UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

 

FORM10-Q

 

 

(Mark One)

QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the quarterly period ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018

 

TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from        to        

Commission file number001-31361

 

 

BioDelivery Sciences International, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

 

 

Delaware 35-2089858

(State or other jurisdiction of

incorporation or organization)

 

(I.R.S. Employer

Identification No.)

4131 ParkLake Ave., Suite 225, Raleigh, NC 27612
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number (including area code):919-582-9050

 

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  ☒    No  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of RegulationS-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  ☒    No  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, or anon-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company or an emerging growth company. See definition of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company”, or “emerging growth company” inRule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

 

Large accelerated filer

 

  

Accelerated filer

 

Non-accelerated filer

 

☐ (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

  

Smaller reporting company

 

   

Emerging growth company

 

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act.  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ☐    No  ☒

As of NovemberAugust 9, 2017,2018, there were 55,898,92759,574,666 shares of company Common Stock issued and 55,883,43659,559,175 shares of company Common Stock outstanding.

 

 

 


BioDelivery Sciences International, Inc. and Subsidiaries

Quarterly Report on Form10-Q

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

   Page 
Page

Part I. Financial Information

Item 1.

 

Financial Statements (unaudited)

  
 

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of SeptemberJune  30, 20172018 and December 31, 20162017

   1 
 

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three and ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and 20162017

   2 
 

Condensed Consolidated Statement of Stockholders’ Equity (Deficit) for the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018

   3 
 

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and 20162017

   4 
 

Supplemental Cash Flow information for the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune  30, 20172018 and 20162017

   5 
 

Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements

   6 

Item 2.

 

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

   2819 

Item 3.

 

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

   3425 

Item 4.

 

Controls and Procedures

   3425 

Cautionary Note on Forward Looking Statements

   3525 

Part II. Other Information

  

Item 1.

 

Legal Proceedings

   3526 

Item 1A.

 

Risk Factors

   3928 

Item 2.

 

Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds

   3928 

Item 3.

 

Defaults upon Senior Securities

   3928 

Item 4.

 

Mine Safety Disclosures

   4028 

Item 5.

 

Other Information

   4028 

Item 6.

 

Exhibits

   4029 

Signatures

   S-1 

Certifications

  


BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT SHARE AND PER SHARE AMOUNTS)

(Unaudited)

 

  September 30,
2017
   December 31,
2016
   June 30,
2018
 December 31,
2017
 
ASSETS    ASSETS 

Current assets:

       

Cash

  $19,746       $32,019   $55,724  $21,195 

Accounts receivable, net

   10,791        3,569    9,410  8,852 

Inventory, net

   6,466        3,368    6,168  6,091 

Prepaid expenses and other current assets

   2,310        4,136    2,156  3,610 
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total current assets

   39,313        43,092    73,458  39,748 

Property and equipment, net

   4,202        4,230    3,366  3,778 

Goodwill

   2,715        2,715    2,715  2,715 

BELBUCA® license and distribution rights intangible

   41,625        —   

BELBUCA® license and distribution rights, net

   38,250  40,500 

Other intangible assets, net

   1,558        2,285    1,032  1,360 
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total assets

  $89,413       $52,322   $118,821  $88,101 
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY (DEFICIT)    
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITYLIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY 

Current liabilities:

       

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities

  $30,807       $18,174   $23,228  $26,149 

Deferred revenue, current

   —          1,716 
  

 

   

 

 
  

 

  

 

 

Total current liabilities

   30,807        19,890    23,228  26,149 

Notes payable, net of discount and loan costs

   35,701        29,272 

Deferred revenue, long-term

   —          20,000 

Notes payable, net

   49,394  47,660 

Other long-term liabilities

   4,050        825    5,462  5,415 
  

 

   

 

 
  

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities

   70,558        69,987    78,084  79,224 

Commitments and contingencies (Notes 11 and 16)

    

Commitments and contingencies (Note 12)

   

Stockholders’ equity:

       

Preferred Stock, $.001 par value; 5,000,000 shares authorized; 2,093,155 shares of Series ANon-Voting Convertible Preferred Stock outstanding at both September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively.

   2        2 

Common Stock, $.001 par value; 75,000,000 shares authorized; 55,852,926 and 54,133,511 shares issued; 55,837,435 and 54,118,020 shares outstanding at September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively.

   56        54 

Preferred Stock, 5,000,000 shares authorized; Series ANon-Voting Convertible Preferred Stock. $.001 par value, 2,093,155 shares outstanding at both June 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively; Series BNon-Voting Convertible Preferred Stock, $.001 par value, 5,000 and 0 shares outstanding at June 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively;

   2  2 

Common Stock, $.001 par value; 75,000,000 shares authorized; 59,459,446 and 55,904,072 shares issued; 59,443,955 and 55,888,581 shares outstanding at June 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017, respectively

   59  56 

Additionalpaid-in capital

   307,690        292,667    366,123  313,922 

Treasury stock, at cost, 15,491 shares

   (47)      (47   (47 (47

Accumulated deficit

   (288,846)      (310,341   (325,400 (305,056
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total stockholders’ equity (deficit)

   18,855        (17,665

Total stockholders’ equity

   40,737  8,877 
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity (deficit)

  $89,413       $52,322 

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity

  $118,821  $88,101 
  

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

 

See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT SHARE AND PER SHARE AMOUNTS)

(Unaudited)

 

   Three Months Ended
September 30,
  Nine Months Ended
September 30,
 
   

 

2017

  

 

2016

  

 

2017

  

 

2016

 

Revenues:

     

Product sales

  $8,118  $2,009  $23,798  $6,221 

Product royalty revenues

   1,409   1,065   3,682   2,393 

Research and development reimbursements

   532   497   799   501 

Contract revenues

   1,194   —     21,194   2,500 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total Revenues:

   11,253   3,571   49,473   11,615 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cost of sales

   4,445   2,314   14,261   8,958 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Expenses:

     

Research and development

   1,986   4,402   6,246   13,786 

Selling, general and administrative

   14,867   12,054   44,094   37,606 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total Expenses:

   16,853   16,456   50,340   51,392 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Loss from operations

   (10,045  (15,199  (15,128  (48,735

Interest expense

   (1,893  (786  (6,657  (2,477

Derivative gain

   —     14   —     36 

Other expense, net

   (13  (6  (28  (20

Bargain purchase gain

   —     —     27,336   —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

(Loss) income before income taxes

  $(11,951 $(15,977 $5,523  $(51,196

Income tax benefit

   —     —     15,972   —   
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders

  $(11,951 $(15,977 $21,495  $(51,196
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Basic

     

Basic (loss) income per share:

  $(0.21 $(0.30 $0.39  $(0.96
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Weighted average common stock shares outstanding:

   55,604,708   53,767,099   55,170,569   53,531,770 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Diluted

     

Diluted (loss) income per share:

  $(0.21 $(0.30 $0.38  $(0.96
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Diluted weighted average common stock shares outstanding:

   55,604,708   53,767,099   56,204,358   53,531,770 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

   Three Months Ended June 30,  Six Months Ended June 30, 
   2018  2017  2018  2017 

Revenues:

     

Product sales

  $10,766  $7,886  $20,604  $15,680 

Product royalty revenues

   1,386   613   1,826   2,273 

Research and development reimbursements

   —     245  —     267 

Contract revenues

   23   —     1,026   20,000 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total Revenues:

   12,175   8,744   23,456   38,220 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cost of sales

   4,566   4,171   7,981   9,816 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Expenses:

     

Research and development

   854   1,590   3,338   4,260 

Selling, general and administrative

   14,021   15,970   27,526   29,227 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total Expenses:

   14,875   17,560   30,864   33,487 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Loss from operations

   (7,266  (12,987  (15,389  (5,083

Interest expense

   (2,525  (1,878  (5,030  (4,764

Other expense, net

   1   (14  (6  (15

Bargain purchase gain

   —     —     —     27,336
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

(Loss) income before income taxes

  $(9,790 $(14,879 $(20,425 $17,474 

Income tax benefit (expense)

   20   —     (54  15,972
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net (loss) income attributable to common stockholders

  $(9,770 $(14,879 $(20,479 $33,446 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Basic

     

Basic (loss) income per share:

  $(0.16 $(0.27 $(0.35 $0.61 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Weighted average common stock shares outstanding:

   59,400,317   55,388,774   58,735,351   54,949,901 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Diluted

     

Diluted (loss) income per share:

  $(0.16 $(0.27 $(0.35 $0.60 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Diluted weighted average common stock shares outstanding:

   59,400,317   55,388,774   58,735,351   55,836,769 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY (DEFICIT)

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT SHARE AND PER SHARE AMOUNTS)

(Unaudited)

 

   Preferred Stock
Series A
   Common Stock   Additional
Paid-In
Capital
  Treasury
Stock
  Accumulated
Deficit
  Total
Stockholders’
(Deficit)
Equity
 
   Shares   Amount   Shares   Amount      

Balances, January 1, 2017

   2,093,155   $2    54,133,511   $54   $292,667  $(47 $(310,341 $(17,665

Stock-based compensation

   —      —      —      —      10,223   —     —     10,223 

Restricted stock awards

   —      —      1,568,042    2    (2  —     —     —   

Issuance of warrants

   —      —      —      —      4,489   —     —     4,489 

Exercise of stock options

   —      —      151,373    —      313   —     —     313 

Net income

   —      —      —      —      —     —     21,495   21,495 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balances, September 30, 2017

   2,093,155   $2    55,852,926   $56   $307,690  $(47 $(288,846 $18,855 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

   Preferred Stock
Series A
   Preferred Stock
Series B
   Common Stock   Additional
Paid-In
Capital
  Treasury
Stock
  Accumulated
Deficit
  Total
Stockholders’
Equity
 
   Shares   Amount   Shares   Amount   Shares   Amount 

Balances, January 1, 2018

   2,093,155   $2    —     $—      55,904,072   $56   $313,922  $(47 $(305,056 $8,877 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Stock-based compensation

   —      —      —      —      —      —      4,004   —     —     4,004 

Stock option exercises

   —      —      —      —      169,016    —      306   —     —     306 

Restricted stock awards

   —      —      —      —      1,266,433    1    (1  —     —     —   

Common stock issuance upon retirement

   —      —      —      —      2,119,925    2    (2  —     —     —   

Series B issuance, net of issuance costs

   —      —      5,000    —      —      —      47,894   —     —     47,894 

Cumulative effect of accounting change

   —      —      —      —      —      —      —     —     135   135 

Net loss

   —      —      —      —      —      —      —     —     (20,479  (20,479
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Balances, June 30, 2018

   2,093,155   $2    5,000   $—      59,459,446   $59   $366,123  $(47 $(325,400 $40,737 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

 

   

Nine months ended

September 30,

 
   2017  2016 

Operating activities:

   

Net income (loss)

  $21,495  $(51,196

Depreciation

   465   325 

Accretion of debt discount and loan costs

   1,941   297 

Amortization of intangible assets

   4,103   728 

Derivative liability

   —     100 

Stock-based compensation expense

   10,223   11,600 

Deferred income taxes

   (15,972  —   

Bargain purchase gain

   (27,336  —   

Changes in assets and liabilities:

   

Accounts receivable

   (7,222  (601

Inventories, net of effect of acquisition

   2,314   (1,460

Prepaid expenses and other assets

   1,826   (537

Accounts payable and accrued expenses, net of effect of acquisition

   8,998   (662

Deferred revenue

   (21,716  47 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows from operating activities

   (20,881  (41,359
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Investing activities:

   

BELBUCA® acquisition

   (3,902  —   

Purchase of equipment

   (5  (316
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows from investing activities

   (3,907  (316
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Financing activities:

   

Proceeds from notes payable

   45,000   —   

Payment of notes payable

   (30,000  —   

Payment of deferred financing fees

   (2,798  —   

Equity financing costs

   —     40 

Proceeds from exercise of stock options

   313   297 

Proceeds from issuance of common stock

   —     2,460 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows from financing activities

   12,515   2,797 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net change in cash and cash equivalents

   (12,273  (38,878

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year

   32,019   83,560 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $19,746  $44,682 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash paid for interest

  $3,816  $2,045 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

   Six months ended
June 30,
 
   2018  2017 

Operating activities:

   

Net (loss) income

  $(20,479 $33,446 

Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) income to net cash flows from operating activities

   

Depreciation and amortization

   456   226 

Impairment loss on equipment

   78   —   

Accretion of debt discount and loan costs

   1,782   1,491 

Amortization of intangible assets

   2,578   2,735 

Provision for inventory obsolescence

   412   21 

Stock-based compensation expense

   4,004   6,000 

Deferred income taxes

   —     (15,972

Bargain purchase gain

   —     (27,336

Changes in assets and liabilities, net of effect of acquisition:

   

Accounts receivable

   (423  (2,458

Inventories

   (489  2,639 

Prepaid expenses and other assets

   1,454   1,034 

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities

   (1,118  3,179 

Deferred revenue

   —     (21,716
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows used in operating activities

   (11,745  (16,711
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Investing activities:

   

BELBUCA® acquisition

   (1,951  —   

Purchase of equipment

   (122  (2
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows used in investing activities

   (2,073  (2
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Financing activities:

   

Proceeds from issuance of Series B preferred stock

   50,000   —   

Equity finance costs

   (1,509  —   

Proceeds from notes payable

   —     45,000 

Proceeds from exercise of stock options

   306   —   

Payment on note payable

   —     (30,000

Payment of deferred financing fees

   (450  (2,798
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net cash flows provided by financing activities

   48,347   12,202 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net change in cash and cash equivalents

   34,529   (4,511

Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period

   21,195   32,019 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash and cash equivalents at end of period

  $55,724  $27,508 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Cash paid for interest

  $3,249  $2,373 
  

 

 

  

 

 

 

See notes to condensed consolidated financial statements

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUPPLEMENTAL CASH FLOW INFORMATION

(U.S. DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS EXCEPT SHARE DATA)

Non-cash Operating, Financing and Investing Activities:

The Company recorded the fair value of an accumulated total of 2,119,925 shares of common stock issued to officers who retired from the Company during the six months ended June 30, 2018 totaling approximately $5.3 million to expense in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”).

The Company recorded $0.6 million of accrued financing expenses related to the Series BNon-Voting Convertible offering during the six months ended June 30, 2018. Such expense is recorded as accounts payable and accrued liabilities in the condensed consolidated balance sheet.

The Company recorded the fair value of the bargain purchase price of the BELBUCA® acquisition totaling $27.3 million to income during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017 in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“GAAP”) (see note 7, Business Combinations and Asset Acquisitions).

The Company recorded the fair value of warrants totaling $4.5 million to equity with an offsetting amount to Notes payable in connection with the CRG Term Loan Agreement (as defined in note 11) during the nine months ended September 30, 2017 in accordance with GAAP (see note 13, Stockholders’ Equity).

GAAP.

See notes to consolidated financial statements

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

1. Organization, basis of presentation and summary of significant policies:

1.Organization, basis of presentation and summary of significant policies:

Overview

BioDelivery Sciences International, Inc., together with its subsidiaries (collectively, the “Company”) is a specialty pharmaceutical company that is developing and commercializing, either on its own or in partnerships with third parties, new applications of approved therapeutics to address important unmet medical needs using both proven and new drug delivery technologies. The Company is focusing on developing products to meet unmet patient needs in the areas of pain management and addiction.

The accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements include all adjustments (consisting of normal and recurring adjustments) necessary for a fair presentation of these financial statements. The condensed consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 20162017 has been derived from the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements included in its annual report on Form10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016.2017. Certain footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP have been condensed or omitted pursuant to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) rules and regulations. It is suggested that these condensed consolidated financial statements be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in the Company’s annual report onForm 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016.2017.

Operating results for the three and nine monthsix-month periods ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 are not necessarily indicative of results for the full year or any other future periods.

As used herein, the Company’s common stock, par value $.001 per share, is referred to as the “Common Stock.”

Principles of consolidation

The condensed consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company, Arius Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Arius”), Arius Two, Inc. (“Arius Two”) and Bioral Nutrient Delivery, LLC (“BND”). For each period presented, BND has been an inactive subsidiary. All significant inter-company balances and transactions have been eliminated.

Use of estimates in financial statements

The preparation of the accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The Company reviews all significant estimates affecting the consolidated financial statements on a recurring basis and records the effect of any necessary adjustments prior to their issuance. Significant estimates of the Company include: revenue recognition, sales allowances such as returns of product sold, government program rebates, customer coupon redemptions, wholesaler/pharmacy discounts, product service fees, rebates and chargebacks, sales commissions, amortization,bonuses, stock-based compensation, determination of fair values of assets and liabilities in connection with business combinations, and deferred income taxes.

Reacquisition of BELBUCA®

On December 7, 2016, the Company entered into an agreement (the “Termination Agreement”) with Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Endo”) terminating Endo’s licensing of rights to the Company’s BELBUCA® (buprenorphine) buccal film product (“BELBUCA®”). The closing of the Termination Agreement, and the formal termination of the BELBUCA® license to Endo and closing of the transactions further described below occurred on January 6, 2017 (see note 7, Business Combinations and Asset Acquisitions).

Inventory

Other than the inventory purchased from Endo that remains in inventory at September 30, 2017 and is stated at fair value, inventoriesInventories are stated at the lower of cost or net realizable value with costs determined for each batch under thefirst-in,first-out method and specifically allocated to remaining inventory. Inventory consists of raw materials, work in process and finished goods. Raw materials include amounts of active pharmaceutical ingredient for a product to be manufactured, work in process includes the bulk inventory of laminate (the Company’s drug delivery film) prior to being packaged for sale, and finished goods include pharmaceutical products ready for commercial sale.

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

1.Organization, basis of presentation and summary of significant policies (continued):

On a quarterly basis, the Company analyzes its inventory levels and records allowances for inventory that has become obsolete, inventory that has a cost basis in excess of the expected net realizable value and inventory that is in excess of expected demand based upon projected product sales. The Company recordedreserved $0.7 million and $0.2 million infor inventory allowancesobsolescence as of SeptemberJune 30, 2017. There were no allowances recorded as of2018 and December 31, 2016.2017, respectively.

Deferred revenue

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

Consistent with the Company’s revenue recognition policy, deferred revenue represents cash received in advance for licensing fees, consulting, researchNOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

1. Organization, basis of presentation and development services and related supply agreements. Such payments are reflected as deferred revenue until recognized under the Company’s revenue recognition policy. Deferred revenue is classified as current if management believes the Company will be able to recognize the deferred amount as revenue within twelve monthssummary of the balance sheet date.significant policies (continued):

The Company deferred sales, until January 1, 2017, of its BUNAVAIL® (buprenorphine and naloxone) buccal film, Schedule 3 (“CIII”) product (“BUNAVAIL®”) and recognized such revenue when the product was sold through to the end user. There were no product sales by the Company of BELBUCA® before January 2017.

Revenue recognition

NetProduct sales

As discussed further below in Note 2, effective January 1, 2018, the Company adopted Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”)2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers” (“Topic 606”) and began recognizing revenue under the new accounting guidance on that date. Under the new accounting guidance, the Company recognizes revenue on product sales when control of the promised goods is transferred to its customers in an amount that reflects the consideration expected to be received in exchange for transferring those goods. The Company accounts for a contract when it has approval and commitment from both parties, the rights of the parties are identified, payment terms are identified, the contract has commercial substance and collectability of consideration is probable. When determining whether the customer has obtained control of the goods, the Company considers any future performance obligations. Generally, there is no post-shipment obligations on product sold.

Performance obligations

A performance obligation is a promise in a contract to transfer a distinct good or service to the customer and is the unit of account in Topic 606. A contract’s transaction price is allocated to each distinct performance obligation and recognized as revenue when, or as, the performance obligation is satisfied. The majority of the Company’s product sales contracts have a single performance obligation as the promise to transfer the individual goods is not separately identifiable from other promises in the contracts and, therefore, not distinct. The Company’s performance obligations are satisfied at a point in time. The multiple performance obligations are not allocated based off of the obligations but based off of standard selling price.

Adjustments to product sales

Beginning in the first quarter of 2017, the Company has determined that it had sufficient experience with BELBUCA® and BUNAVAIL® to estimate its returns at time ofex-factory sales. The Company recognizes revenue when it is realized or realizable and earned. Revenue is realized or realizable and earned when all of the following criteria are met: (a) persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists; (b) delivery has occurred or services have been rendered; (c) the Company’s price to the buyer is fixed or determinable; and (d) collectability is reasonably assured. The Company sells its products primarily to large national wholesalers, which have the right to return the products they purchase. The Company recognizes revenue from sales transactions where the buyer has the right to return the product at the time of sale only if (1) the Company’s price to the buyer is substantially fixed or determinable at the date of sale, (2) the buyer has paid the Company, or the buyer is obligated to pay the Company and the obligation is not contingent on resale of the product, (3) the buyer’s obligation to the Company would not be changed in the event of theft or physical destruction or damage of the product, (4) the buyer acquiring the product for resale has economic substance apart from any provided by the Company, (5) the Company does not have significant obligations for future performance to directly bring about resale of the product by the buyer, and (6) the amount of future returns can be reasonably estimated. The Company recognizes product sales net of estimated allowances for rebates, price adjustments, returns, chargebacks and prompt payment discounts. GivenA significant majority of the sufficient experience with BELBUCA®Company’s adjustments to gross product revenues are the result of accruals for its commercial contracts, retail consumer subsidy programs, and BUNAVAIL®, the Company can reasonably estimate the amount of future product returns, and therefore, the risk of estimating product returns has been substantially eliminated. The effect in income from operations and on net income is that the Company is able to recognize revenue earlier on thesell-in method, net of a provision for estimated returns, since the Company can record revenue once sold to the wholesaler rather than waiting until the product is sold to the end user on a sell-through basis.Medicaid rebates.

The Company establishes allowances for estimated rebates, chargebacks and product returns based on numerous qualitative and quantitative factors, including:

 

the number of and specific contractual terms of agreements with customers;

 

estimated levels of inventory in the distribution channel;

 

historical rebates, chargebacks and returns of products;

 

direct communication with customers;

 

anticipated introduction of competitive products or generics;

 

anticipated pricing strategy changes by the Company and/or its competitors;

 

analysis of prescription data gathered by a third-party prescription data provider;

 

the impact of changes in state and federal regulations; and

 

the estimated remaining shelf life of products.

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

1.Organization, basis of presentation and summary of significant policies (continued):

In its analyses, the Company uses prescription data purchased from a third-party data provider to develop estimates of historical inventory channel sell-through. The Company utilizes an internal analysis to compare historical net product shipments (shipments less returns) to estimated historical prescriptions written. Based on that analysis, management develops an estimate of the quantity of product in the channel which may be subject to various rebate, chargeback and product return exposures. To estimate months of ending inventory in the Company’s distribution channel, the Company divides estimated ending inventory in the distribution channel by the Company’s recent prescription data, not taking into accountconsidering any future anticipated demand growth beyond the succeeding quarter.growth. Monthly, for each product line, the Company prepares an internal estimate of ending inventory units in the distribution channel by adding estimated inventory in the channel at the beginning of the period, plus net product shipments for the period, less estimated prescriptions written for the period. This is done for each product line by applying a rate of historical activity for rebates, chargebacks and product returns, adjusted for relevant quantitative and qualitative factors discussed above, to the potential exposed product estimated to be in the distribution channel. In addition, the Company receives daily information from the wholesalers regarding their sales and actual on hand inventory levels of the Company’s products. This enables the Company to execute accurate provisioning procedures.

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

1. Organization, basis of presentation and summary of significant policies (continued):

ProductReturns returns-Consistent with industry practice, the Company offers contractual return rights that allow its customers to return the products within an18-month period that begins six months prior to and ends twelve months subsequent toafter expiration of the products. The accrual to payment cycle for returns is longer and can take several years depending on the expiration of the related products.

Rebates- The-The liability for government program rebates is calculated based on historical and current rebate redemption and utilization rates contractually submitted by each program’s administrator.

PriceAdjustments adjustments andChargebacks chargebacks-The Company’s estimates of price adjustments and chargebacks are based on its estimated mix of sales to various third-party payers, which are entitled either contractually or statutorily to discounts from the Company’s listed prices of its products. In the event thatIf the sales mix to third-party payers is different from the Company’s estimates, the Company may be required towill pay higher or lower total price adjustments and/or chargebacks than it had estimated and such differences may be significant.estimated.

The Company, from time to time, offers certain promotional product-related incentives to its customers. These programs include certain product incentives to pharmacy customers and other sales stocking allowances. The Company has voucher programs for BELBUCA®and BUNAVAIL®whereby the Company offers apoint-of-sale subsidy to retail consumers. The Company estimates its liabilities for these voucher programs based on the actual redemption rates as reported to the Company by a third-party claims processing organization. The Company accounts for the costs of these special promotional programs as price adjustments, which are a reduction of gross revenue.

PromptPaymentDiscounts payment discounts-The Company typically offers its wholesale customers a prompt payment discount of 2% as an incentive to remit payments within the first 30 to 37a specified number days after the invoice date, depending on the customer and the products purchased.

GrosstoNetAccruals-A significant majority of the Company’s gross to net adjustments to gross product revenues are the result of accruals for its voucher program and Medicaid rebates,agreement with the majority of those programs having an accrual to payment cycle of anywhere from one to three months. In addition to this relatively short accrual to payment cycle, the Company receives daily information from the wholesalers regarding their sales of the Company’s products and actual on hand inventory levels of its products. This enables the Company to execute accurate provisioning procedures. Consistent with the pharmaceutical industry, the accrual to payment cycle for returns is longer and can take several years depending on the expiration of the related products.customer.

Cost of sales

Cost of sales includes the direct costs attributable to the production of BREAKYL and PAINKYL (the Company’sout-licensed breakthrough cancer pain therapies). It includes all costs related to creating the product at the Company’s contract manufacturing location in Germany. The Company’s contract manufacturer bills the Company for the final product, which includes materials, direct labor costs, and certain overhead costs as outlined in applicable supply agreements. Cost of sales also includes royalty expenses that the Company owes to third parties.

For BELBUCA®and BUNAVAIL®, cost of sales. It includes raw materials, production costs at the Company’s three contract manufacturing sites, quality testing directly related to the products, and depreciation on equipment that the Company has purchased to produce BELBUCA®and BUNAVAIL®. It also includes any batches not meeting specifications and raw material yield losses. Yield losses and batches not meeting specificationswhich are expensed as incurred. Prior to January 1, 2017, costCost of sales was recognized as actual product was sold throughalso includes royalty expenses that the Company owes to third parties.

Reclassification

Certain amounts were reclassified between Provision for inventory obsolescence, Accounts receivable, Inventories and Accounts payable and accrued expenses in the end user. Beginning January 1,Condensed Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows for the six months ended June 30, 2017 cost of sales is recognized when sold to conform to current year presentation. These reclassifications had no effect on the wholesalerpreviously reported net cash flows from our distribution center.

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

1.Organization, basis of presentation and summary of significant policies (continued):

operations, activities or net losses.

Recent accounting pronouncementspronouncements-issued, not yet adopted

In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers,” which supersedes the revenue recognition requirements of Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 605, “Revenue Recognition” and most industry-specific guidance on revenue recognition throughout the ASC. The new standard is principles-based and provides a five step model to determine when and how revenue is recognized. The core principle of the new standard is that revenue should be recognized when a company transfers promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the Company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The new standard also requires disclosure of qualitative and quantitative information surrounding the amount, nature, timing and uncertainty of revenues and cash flows arising from contracts with customers. In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU2016-10, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing.” ASU2016-10 clarifies the implementation guidance on identifying performance obligations. These accounting standard updates (each individually an “ASU”) apply to all companies that enter into contracts with customers to transfer goods or services. These two ASUs are effective for public entities for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. The new standards are required to be adopted using either a full-retrospective or a modified-retrospective approach. The Company expects to adopt the new standards by using the modified retrospective approach with the cumulative effect of the change reflected in retained earnings as of January 1, 2018 and to not restate prior periods. The Company has commenced work to assess the impact of the new revenue standard on its principal revenue streams. The Company has not made a determination on the impact to its consolidated financial statements. The Company is implementing changes to its accounting processes, internal controls and disclosures to support the new accounting.

The FASB’s new leases standard, ASU2016-02, Leases (Topic 842), was issued on February 25, 2016. ASU2016-022016, is intended to improve financial reporting about leasing transactions. The ASU affects all companies and other organizations that lease assets such as real estate, airplanes, and manufacturing equipment. The ASU will require organizations that lease assets referred to as “Lessees” to recognize on the balance sheet the assets and liabilities for the rights and obligations created by those leases. An organization is to provide disclosures designed to enable users of financial statements to understand the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. These disclosures include qualitative and quantitative requirements concerning additional information about the amounts recorded in the financial statements. Under the new guidance, a lessee will be required to recognize assets and liabilities for leases with lease terms of more than 12 months. Consistent with current GAAP, the recognition, measurement, and presentation of expenses and cash flows arising from a lease by a lessee primarily will depend on its classification as a finance or operating lease.

However, unlike current GAAP which requires only capital leases to be recognized on the balance sheet, the new ASU will require both types of leases (i.e., operating and capital leases) to be recognized on the balance sheet. The FASB lessee accounting model will continue to account for both types of leases. The capital lease will be accounted for in substantially the same manner as capital leases are accounted for under existing GAAP. The operating lease will be accounted for in a manner similar to operating leases under existing GAAP, except that lessees will recognize a lease liability and a lease asset for all of those leases. The new standard requires a modified-retrospective approach to adoption and is effective for interim and annual periods beginning on January 1, 2019 but may be adopted earlier. The Company expects to adopt this standard beginning in 2019. The Company does not expect that this standard will have a material impact on its consolidated statements of operations, but the Company does expect that upon adoption, this standard will impact the carrying value of its assets and liabilities on its consolidated balance sheets as a result of the requirement to record

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

1. Organization, basis of presentation and summary of significant policies (continued):

right-of-use assets and corresponding lease obligations for current operating leases. In addition, the standard will require that the Company update its systems, processes and controls it uses to track, record and account for its lease portfolio.

In January 2017,ASU2018-07, issued in June 2018, expands the FASB issuedscope of Topic 718, “Compensation – Stock Compensation”, to include share-based payment transactions for acquiring goods and services from nonemployees. The objective of the ASU2017-01, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Clarifying is to maintain or improve the Definitionusefulness of a Business.the information provided to the users of financial statements while reducing cost and complexity by simplifying several aspects of existing guidance. The amendments in this update provide a screen to determine when an integrated set of assets and activities (a “set”) is not a business. The screen requires that when substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired (or disposed of) is concentrated in a single identifiable asset or a group of similar identifiable assets, the set is not a business. The new standard also requires that a business include at least one substantive process and narrows the definition of outputs. The new guidance will be applied prospectively and isare effective for the Companypublic business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim and annual periods beginning on January 1, 2018within that fiscal year and early adoption is permitted. The Company expectsis currently assessing the impact of adopting this ASU on its condensed consolidated financial statements.

2. Revenue from contracts with customers:

Effective January 1, 2018, the Company adopted Topic 606. The Company elected to adoptapply the standard using the modified retrospective method beginning January 1, 2018. The Company applied this standard beginning in 2018. Adoptionguidance only to those contracts that were not completed at the date of this new standard mayadoption. As a result in more transactions being accounted for as asset acquisitions versus business combinations; however,of adoption, the cumulative impact to the Company’s consolidated financial statementsretained earnings at January 1, 2018 was $0.135 million. The comparative information has not been restated and continues to be reported under the accounting standards in effect for those periods. The Company expects the impact of the adoption of the new standard on its existing contracts to be immaterial to the Company’s net income on an ongoing basis, however additional disclosures have been added in accordance with the ASU.

The Company does not anticipate any significant changes in the timing or amount of revenue recognized for the Company’s product sales and relatedgross-to-net adjustments under Topic 606. The Company’s net product sales continue to be recognized when delivery has occurred, and itsgross-to-net adjustments are estimated and recorded in the accounting period related to when sales occur in the manner fundamentally consistent with the Company’s prior accounting methodology.

Under the new standard, timing for recognition of certain contract revenue may be accelerated such that a portion of revenue will dependbe estimated and recognized in revenue earlier than the previous accounting standards. During the six months ended June 30, 2018, the Company recorded financing revenue for two milestones that are not due until 2020 and 2023, respectively.

The main types of revenue contracts are:

Productsales-Product sales amounts relate to sales of BELBUCA® and BUNAVAIL®. These sales are recognized as revenue when control is transferred to the wholesaler in an amount that reflects the consideration expected to be received.

Product royaltyrevenues-Product royalty revenue amounts are based on sales revenue of BELBUCA® under the Company’s license agreement with Purdue Pharma, the PAINKYL product under the Company’s license agreement with TTY and the BREAKYL product under the Company’s license agreement with Meda. Product royalty revenues are recognized when control of the product is transferred to the license partner in an amount that reflects the consideration expected to be received. Supplemental sales-based product royalty revenue may also be earned upon the subsequent sale of the product at agreed upon contractual rates.

Contractrevenue-Contract revenue amounts are related to milestone payments under the Company’s license agreements with its partners including any associated financing component.

The impact of adoption of Topic 606 on the facts and circumstancesCompany’s condensed consolidated balance sheet as of future transactions.June 30, 2018 follows (in thousands):

   Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet 
   June 30, 2018 
   As reported   Balances
without
adoption of
Topic 606
   Effect of
Adoption
 

Accounts receivable, net

  $9,410   $9,062   $348 

Accumulated deficit

  $(325,400  $(325,748  $348 

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

2. Revenue from contracts with customers (continued):

 

1.Organization, basis of presentation and summary of significant policies (continued):

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU Update No.2017-04, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the TestThe impact of Goodwill Impairment. This ASU simplifies the accounting for goodwill impairment for all entities by requiring impairment charges to be basedadoption of Topic 606 on the first stepCompany’s condensed consolidated statement of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2018 follows (in thousands):

   Condensed Consolidated
Statement of Operations
Three months ended June 30, 2018
   Condensed Consolidated
Statement of Operations
Six months ended June 30, 2018
 
   As
reported
  Balances
without
adoption of
Topic 606
  Effect of
Adoption
   As
reported
  Balances
without
adoption of
Topic 606
  Effect of
Adoption
 

Product sales

  $10,766  $10,766  $—    $20,604  $20,604  $—   

Product royalty revenues

   1,386   1,386   —      1,826   1,826   —   

Contract revenues

   23   —     23    1,026   813   213 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Total revenues

  $12,175  $12,152  $23   $23,456  $23,243  $213 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

Net loss attributable to common stockholders

  $(9,770 $(9,793 $23   $(20,479 $(20,692 $213 
  

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

  

 

 

  

 

 

 

The beginning and ending balances of the goodwill impairment test under ASC 350. Under previous guidance, ifCompany’s accounts receivables with customers from contracts during the fair value of a reporting unitperiods presented is lower than its carrying amount (Step 1), an entity calculates any impairment charge by comparing the implied fair value of goodwill with its carrying amount (Step 2). The implied fair value of goodwill is calculated by deducting the fair value of all assets and liabilities of the reporting unit from the reporting unit’s fair value as determined in Step 1. To determine the implied fair value of goodwill, entities estimate the fair value of any unrecognized intangible assets (includingin-process research and development) and any corporate-level assets or liabilities that were included in the determination of the carrying amount and fair value of the reporting unit in Step 1. Under this new guidance if a reporting unit’s carrying value exceeds its fair value, an entity will record an impairment charge based on that difference with such impairment charge limited to the amount of goodwill in the reporting unit. This ASU does not change the guidance on completing Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test. An entity will still be able to perform today’s optional qualitative goodwill impairment assessment before determining whether to proceed to Step 1. This ASU will be applied prospectively and is effective for annual and interim impairment test performed in periods beginning after December 15, 2019 for public business enterprises. Early adoption is permitted for annual and interim goodwill impairment testing dates after January 1, 2017. The Company currently does not expect any impact of the adoption of the ASU on its condensed consolidated financial statements.follows (in thousands):

 

2.Liquidity and management’s plans:
   Balance at
January 1,
2018
   Six months
ended June 30,
2018
   Balance at
June 30,
2018
 

Accounts receivable with customers

  $8,987   $423   $9,410 

3. Liquidity and management’s plans:

At SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2018, the Company had cash of approximately $19.7$55.7 million. The Company used $12.3$11.7 million of cash in operations during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and had stockholders’ equity of $18.9$40.7 million, versus stockholders’ deficitequity of $17.7$8.9 million at December 31, 2016.2017. The Company expects that it has accesssufficient cash to additional capital through CRG Servicing LLC (“CRG”) frommanage the CRG loanbusiness as currently planned into the second quarter of $15 million as well as equity markets if the Company chooses or a combination of both that2020 which would provide sufficient capital necessary to extend its runway throughsupport the endcontinued commercialization of BELBUCA® and BUNAVAIL®.

On May 17, 2018, the Company executed agreements relating to the Company’s registered direct offering, issuance and beyond. Thissale of an aggregate of 5,000 shares of the Company’s newly designated Series BNon-Voting Convertible Preferred Stock. On May 21, 2018, the Company closed the offering, which yielded net proceeds of $47.9 million to the Company.

The Company’s cash on hand estimation assumes the availability of the foregoing capital sources and further assumes that the Company does not accelerate the development of existing, or acquire other drug development opportunities or otherwise face unexpected events, costs or contingencies, any of which could affect the Company’s cash requirements. As a result of the Company’s late filing of certain financing information relatedrequirements from time to its reacquisition of BELBUCA®, the Company is unable to utilize its universal shelf registration statement and associatedat-the-market offering program until April 2018.

Additional capital will be required to support the commercialization of the Company’s reacquired BELBUCA® product, ongoing commercialization activities for BUNAVAIL®, the reformulation project for and the anticipated commercial relaunch of ONSOLIS® (which isout-licensed to Collegium Pharmaceutical, Inc. (“Collegium”) in the US), the continued development of Buprenorphine Depot Injection or other products which may be acquired or licensed by the Company, and for general working capital requirements. Based on product development timelines and agreements with the Company’s development partners, the ability to scale up or reduce personnel and associated costs are factors considered throughout the product development life cycle.time. Available resources may be consumed more rapidly than currently anticipated, potentially resulting in the need for additional funding. Additional funding, capital or loans (including, without limitation, milestone or other payments from commercialization agreements) may be unavailable on favorable terms, if at all.all, which could leave the Company without adequate capital resources.

3.Inventory:

The following table represents the components of inventory as of:

   September 30,
2017
   December 31,
2016
 

Raw materials & supplies

   $1,752           $978 

Work-in-process

   2,180            1,660 

Finished goods

   2,687            730 

Finished goods reserve

   (153)           —   
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total inventories, net

   $6,466           $3,368 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

4. Inventory:

The following table represents the components of inventory as of:

 

4.Accounts payable and accrued liabilities:
   June 30,
2018
   December 31,
2017
 

Raw materials & supplies

  $713   $1,338 

Work-in-process

   3,100    3,135 

Finished goods

   3,010    1,861 

Obsolescence reserve

   (655   (243
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Total inventories

  $6,168   $6,091 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

5. Accounts payable and accrued liabilities:

The following table represents the components of accounts payable and accrued liabilities as of:

 

  September 30,
2017
   December 31,
2016
   June 30,
2018
   December 31,
2017
 

Accounts payable

   $11,645         $9,397   $10,056   $12,236 

Accrued price adjustments

   3,036          592 

Accrued rebates

   7,056    5,648 

Accrued compensation and benefits

   1,757    3,472 

Accrued acquisition costs

   1,412    2,311 

Accrued returns

   857          —      1,293    915 

Accrued acquisition consideration

   4,838          —   

Accrued rebates

   5,057          3,842 

Accrued chargebacks

   101          10 

Accrued compensation and benefits

   3,067          2,052 

Accrued royalties

   488          518    503    488 

Accrued clinical trial costs

   7          615    317    234 

Accrued legal costs

   562          490 

Accrued manufacturing costs

   200          200 

Accrued sales and marketing costs

   —            193 

Accrued legal

   227    216 

Accrued other

   949          265    607    629 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total accounts payable and accrued expenses

   $30,807         $18,174 

Total accounts payable and accrued liabilities

  $23,228   $26,149 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

6. Property and equipment:

5.Property and equipment:

Property and equipment, summarized by major category, consist of the following as of:

 

  September 30,
2017
   December 31,
2016
   June 30,
2018
   December 31,
2017
 

Machinery & equipment

   $ 5,629         $4,476   $5,623   $5,428 

Computer equipment & software

   394          464    413    399 

Office furniture & equipment

   169          202    169    169 

Leasehold improvements

   44          53    44    44 

Idle equipment

   766          1,486    679    766 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total

   7,002          6,681    6,928    6,806 

Less accumulated depreciation

   (2,800)         (2,451
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total property, plant & equipment, net

   $ 4,202         $4,230 

Less accumulated depreciation and amortization

   (3,562   (3,028
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total property and equipment, net

  $3,366   $3,778 
  

 

   

 

 

Depreciation and amortization expense for the nine monthsix-month periods ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and SeptemberJune 30, 2016,2017, was approximately $0.5 million and $0.3$3.0 million, respectively. Depreciation expense for the three monththree-month periods ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and SeptemberJune 30, 2016,2017, was approximately $0.2 million and $0.1$1.5 million, respectively.

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

6.License and development agreements:

The Company has periodically entered into license and development agreements to develop and commercialize certain of its products. The arrangements typically are multi-deliverable arrangements that are funded through upfront payments, milestone payments, royalties and other forms of payment to the Company. The Company’s most significant license and development agreements are as follows:

Meda license, development and supply agreements

On January 27, 2015, the Company announced that it had entered into an assignment and revenue sharing agreement with Meda AB (“Meda”), a subsidiary of Mylan N.V., to return to the Company the marketing authorization for ONSOLIS® in the U.S. and the right to seek marketing authorizations for ONSOLIS® in Canada and Mexico. Following the return of the U.S. marketing authorization from Meda, the Company submitted a prior approval supplement for the new formulation to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) in March 2015, which was approved in August 2016. In connection with the return to the Company by Meda of the U.S. marketing authorization in January 2015, the remaining U.S.-related deferred revenue of $1.0 million was recorded as contract revenue during the year ended December 31, 2015. On February 27, 2016, the Company entered into an extension of the assignment and revenue sharing agreement to extend the period until December 31, 2016, which terminated on May 11, 2016 upon the signing of the Termination and Revenue Sharing Agreement (“the Agreement”).

Efforts to extend the Company’s supply agreement with its ONSOLIS® manufacturer, Aveva, which is now a subsidiary of Apotex, Inc., were unsuccessful and the agreement expired. However, the Company identified an alternate supplier and requested guidance from the FDA on the specific requirements for obtaining approval to supply product from this new vendor. Based on the Company’s current estimates, the Company will submit the necessary documentation to the FDA for qualification of the new manufacturer by the end of 2017.

On May 11, 2016, the Company and Collegium executed a definitive License and Development Agreement (the “License Agreement”) under which the Company has granted to Collegium the exclusive rights to develop and commercialize ONSOLIS® in the U.S. See “Collegium License and Development Agreement” below.

Collegium license and development agreement

On May 11, 2016, the Company and Collegium executed a License Agreement under which the Company granted Collegium the exclusive rights to develop and commercialize ONSOLIS® in the U.S.

Under the terms of the License Agreement, Collegium will be responsible for the manufacturing, distribution, marketing and sales of ONSOLIS® in the U.S. The Company is obligated to use commercially reasonable efforts to continue the transfer of manufacturing to the anticipated manufacturer for ONSOLIS® and to submit a corresponding Prior Approval Supplement (the “Supplement”) to the FDA with respect to the current NDA for ONSOLIS®. Following approval of the Supplement, the NDA and manufacturing responsibility for ONSOLIS® (including the manufacturing relationship with the Company’s manufacturer, subject to the Company entering into an appropriate agreement with such manufacturer that is acceptable and assignable to Collegium) will be transferred to Collegium.

Financial terms of the License Agreement include:

a $2.5 million upfrontnon-refundable payment, payable to the Company within 30 days of execution of the License Agreement (received June 2016);

reimbursement to the Company for apre-determined amount of the remaining expenses associated with the ongoing transfer of the manufacturing of ONSOLIS®;

$4 million payable to the Company upon first commercial sale of ONSOLIS® in the U.S;

$3 million payable to the Company related to ONSOLIS® milestone payable by Collegium to the Company upon obtaining patent extension for ONSOLIS®, which occurred March 2017, and the FDA approval of submission to qualify a new manufacturing site for ONSOLIS®expected the first half of 2018;

up to $17 million in potential payments to the Company based on achievement of certain performance and sales milestones; and

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

6.License and development agreements (continued):

upper-teen percent royalties payable by Collegium to the Company based on various annual U.S. net sales thresholds, subject to customary adjustments and the royalty sharing arrangements described below.

Pursuant to the License Agreement, the royalty from Collegium to the Company terminates after the (a) expiration of thelast-to-expire valid claim of the licensed patents in the territory covering a particular licensed product or (b) generic saturation for such licensed product. The License Agreement also contains customary termination provisions that include a right by either party to terminate upon the other party’s uncured material breach, insolvency or bankruptcy, as well as in the event a certain commercial milestone is not met.

ONSOLIS® was originally licensed to, and launched in the U.S. by, Meda. In January 2015, the Company entered into an assignment and revenue sharing agreement (the “ARS Agreement”) with Meda pursuant to which Meda transferred the marketing authorizations for ONSOLIS® in the U.S. back to the Company. Under the ARS Agreement, financial terms were established that enable Meda to share a significant portion of the proceeds of milestone and royalty payments received by the Company from any new North American partnership for ONSOLIS® that may be executed by the Company. The execution of the License Agreement between the Company and Collegium also required the execution of a definitive termination agreement between the Company and Meda embodying those royalty-sharing terms, returning ONSOLIS®-related assets and rights in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico to the Company, and including certain other provisions. In addition, the Company’s royalty obligations to CDC IV, LLC (“CDC”) and its assignees will remain in effect. CDC provided funding for the development of ONSOLIS® in the past.

Endo license and development agreement

In January 2012, the Company entered into a License and Development Agreement with Endo pursuant to which the Company granted Endo an exclusive commercial world-wide license to develop, manufacture, market and sell the Company’s BELBUCA® product and to complete U.S. development of such product candidate for purposes of seeking FDA approval (the “Endo Agreement”). BELBUCA® is for the management of pain severe enough to require daily,around-the-clock, long-term opioid treatment and for which alternative treatment options are inadequate.

Pursuant to the Endo Agreement, the Company has received the following payments:

$30 millionnon-refundable upfront license fee (earned in January 2012);

$15 million for enhancement of intellectual property rights (earned in May 2012);

$20 million for full enrollment in two clinical trials ($10 million earned in January 2014 and $10 million earned in June 2014);

$10 million upon FDA acceptance of filing NDA (earned in February 2015);

$50 million upon regulatory approval, earned in October 2015 and received in November 2015. Of the $50 million received in November 2015, $20 million related to a patent extension and was recorded as deferred revenue because all or a portion of such $20 million was contingently refundable to Endo if a third party generic product was introduced in the U.S. during the patent extension period from 2020 to 2027. However, due to the Company and Endo entering into a Termination Agreement on December 7, 2016 which terminated the BELBUCA® license to Endo effective January 6, 2017, the deferred $20 million was recognized as revenue during the nine months ended September 30, 2017 in the accompanying condensed consolidated statement of operations (see note 7, Business Combination and Asset Acquisition).

7.Business combination and BELBUCA® acquisition:

On December 7, 2016, the Company and Endo entered into the Termination Agreement to terminate Endo’s licensing rights for BELBUCA®. The transaction closed on January 6, 2017. At the closing date, the Company purchased from Endo the following net assets (the “net assets”): (i) current BELBUCA® product inventory andwork-in-progress, (ii) material manufacturing contracts related to BELBUCA® , (iii) BELBUCA®-related domain names and trademarks (including the BELBUCA® trademark), (iv) BELBUCA® -related manufacturing equipment, and(v) all pre-approval regulatory submissions, including any Investigational New Drug Applications and New Drug Applications, regulatory approvals and post-approval regulatory submissions concerning BELBUCA® . The purchase price for the net assets (the “Asset Purchase Price”) was equal to the sum of: (i) the aggregate book value of the portion of the transferred product inventory forecasted to be used or sold by the Company, (ii) the aggregate book valueof work-in-

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

7.Business combination and BELBUCA® acquisitions (continued):

 

progress inventory,7. License agreements and (iii) the assumption of any assumed liabilities. Together with the Asset Purchase Price, pursuant to the terms of the Termination Agreement, the Company will also pay to Endo a fee in the amount of $5 million in consideration for (i) Endo’s agreement not to compete for a period of two years from the closing date of the termination agreement and (ii) Endo’s waiver of its right to sellacquired product for twelve months following the closing of the termination agreement.rights:

At the closing date, the Company accepted transfer of the net assets and assumed and agreed to discharge when due all applicable liabilities assumed by the Company, which consisted of post-closing obligations for liabilities and payments associated with the net assets, the assumed contracts related to the net assets and applicable taxes (with the obligation forpre-closing and other certain liabilities resulting from the acts or omissions of Endo being retained by Endo). The Asset Purchase Price, together with all other payments (including anon-compete covenant payment) due to Endo under the Termination Agreement, will be paid to Endo in cash in four quarterly installments on the last calendar day of each quarter in 2017. Furthermore, the Company is not responsible for future royalties or milestone payments to Endo and Endo is not obligated to any future milestone payments to the Company. The Termination Agreement contains customary representations and warranties and mutual releases and indemnification.

At the closing date, the Company and Endo entered into a Transition Services Agreement which governed the post-closing rights and responsibilities of the Company and Endo in connection with the license termination and the transfer of the Assets to the Company. Under this agreement, the Company and Endo agreed to the handling of transition matters such as managing customer contracts, BELBUCA® price reporting, payments, returns and rebates, and customer and managed care relations. In connection therewith, Endo has agreed to provide to the Company an agreed upon number of work hours to be provided by Endo personnel during the transition for certain of these transition services and other assistance with respect to the transition of BELBUCA® to the Company.

The BELBUCA® acquisition was accounted for as a business combination in accordance with ASC No. 805,BusinessCombinations which, among other things, requires assets acquired and liabilities assumed to be measured at their acquisition date fair values. Determining the fair value of certain acquired assets and liabilities is subjective in nature and often involves the use of significant estimates and assumptions, including, but not limited to, the selection of appropriate valuation methodology, projected revenue, expenses and cash flows, weighted average cost of capital, discount rates, and estimates of terminal values. The Company believes the estimates used are reasonable and the significant effects of the BELBUCA® acquisition are properly reflected.

The following table summarizes the consideration paid to acquire BELBUCA® and the estimated values of assets acquired and liabilities assumed in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheet based on their fair values on January 6, 2017 (the date of the Endo Closing):

Asset purchase price:

  

Deferred cash consideration to Endo

  $7,536 
  

 

 

 

Total asset purchase price

  $7,536 
  

 

 

 

Estimated fair value of assets acquired:

  

Current BELBUCA® product inventory andwork-in process

  $5,412 

BELBUCA®-related manufacturing equipment

   432 

License and distribution rights intangible assets

   45,000 

Deferred tax liability

   (15,972
  

 

 

 

Amount attributable to assets acquired

  $34,872 
  

 

 

 

Bargain purchase gain

  $(27,336
  

 

 

 

Inventories acquired included raw materials,work-in-progress and finished goods. The fair value of the acquired finished goods inventory was estimated by adjusting the anticipated selling price costs to sell and an appropriate profit on selling activities. Forwork-in-process, in addition to those inputs used to estimate the fair value of finished goods, the cost and estimated profit on completing the manufacturing are also included. The fair value of the raw materials represent cost to acquire the materials from suppliers.

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

7.Business combination and BELBUCA® acquisitions (continued):

The fair value of the equipment was determined by consideration of replacement cost and equipment condition and was assigned a useful life of seven years. The fair value of the license and distribution rights intangible assets as amortized in the accompanying condensed consolidated balance sheets were estimated primarily using the “income method,” which starts with a forecast of all expected future cash flows. As such, it is considered level 3 in the fair value hierarchy. Some of the more significant assumptions inherent in the development of intangible asset values, from the perspective of a market participant, include: the amount and timing of projected future cash flows (including net revenue, cost of sales, commercial expenses, research and development costs and working capital requirements) as well as estimated contributory asset charges; the discount rate selected to measure the risks inherent in the future cash flows; and the assessment of the asset’s life cycle and the competitive trends impacting the asset, among other factors. The license and distribution rights intangible assets will be amortized over ten years, which approximates the current, remaining patent life of the BELBUCA® -related intellectual property.

As a result of the business combination, the Company recognized a deferred tax liability of $16.0 million. This deferred tax liability was netted against its deferred tax assets as of September 30, 2017. Because a full valuation allowance has been provided against the Company’s deferred tax assets as it is considered more likely than not that they will not be utilized, the Company released a corresponding amount of its valuation allowance during the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and recognized a $16.0 million tax benefit in the accompanying condensed consolidated statement of operations.

In January 2017, the Company recorded the asset acquisition as a bargain purchase gain of $27.3 million in the accompanying condensed consolidated statement of operations.

Pro forma impact of acquisition of BELBUCA®

The following pro forma combined results of operations are provided for the year ended December 31, 2016, as though the BELBUCA® acquisition had been completed as of January 1, 2016. These pro forma results are not presented for the interim period as the BELBUCA® product line was not previously accounted for as a stand-alone business and interim results are therefore unavailable. These supplemental pro forma results of operations are provided for illustrative purposes only and do not purport to be indicative of the actual results that would have been achieved by the combined company for the periods presented or that may be achieved by the combined company in the future. The pro forma results of operations do not include any cost savings or other synergies that resulted, or may result, from the BELBUCA® acquisition or any estimated costs that will be incurred to integrate the BELBUCA® product line, nor do they reflect the bargain purchase gain recognized. Future results may vary significantly from the results in this pro forma information because of future events and transactions, as well as other factors.

(in thousands, except per share data)  December 31,
2016
(unaudited)
 

Revenue

  $25,010 

Net loss

  $(201,769

Pro forma net loss per common share

  

Basic

  $(3.76

Diluted

  $(3.76

The Company’s historical financial information was adjusted to give effect to the pro forma events that were directly attributable to the BELBUCA® acquisition and factually supportable. The unaudited pro forma consolidated results include historical revenues and expenses of assets acquired in the acquisition with the following adjustments:

Adjustment to recognize incremental amortization expense based on the fair value of intangibles acquired;

Adjustment to recognize incremental depreciation expense for equipment acquired in the acquisition.

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

8.License obligations:

Evonik development and exclusive license option agreement:

On October 27, 2014, the Company entered into a definitive Development and Exclusive License Option Agreement (the “Development Agreement”) with Evonik Corporation, (“Evonik”) to develop and commercialize an injectable, extended release, microparticle formulation of buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid dependence (the “Evonik Product”). Under the Development Agreement, the Company also has the right to pursue development of the Evonik Product for pain management.

This product candidate is currently in thepre-clinical stage of development. An Investigational New Drug Application (“IND”) for the treatment of opioid dependence was filed in the fourth quarter 2016.

9.Other license agreements and acquired product rights:

Purdue license and supply agreement:

On July 12, 2017, the Company, along with Purdue Pharma, an Ontario limited partnership (“Purdue”), announced that they had executed an exclusive agreement granting to Purdue the licensing, distribution, marketing and sale rights related to BELBUCA® in Canada. Financial terms of the Purdue agreement include: (i) total upfront and other cash milestone payments (relating to marketing authorization transfer and certain other marketing- and sales-related milestones) of up to an aggregate of CAD 4.5 million, including approximately CAD 1.5 million (0.5 million CAD and 1.0 million CAD received August 2017 and October 2017, respectfully); (ii) a low double digit percent royalty payable quarterly by Purdue to the Company based on Canadian net sales of BELBUCA®, which royalty rate is subject to adjustment in certain circumstances; (iii) an annual royalty fee commencing a period of time after the commercial launch of BELBUCA® in Canada, which fee is creditable against royalties payable by Purdue and subject to reduction in certain circumstances; and (iv) payment by Purdue of certain costs incurred to obtain and transfer the marketing authorization for BELBUCA® in Canada, a portion of which will be reimbursed byCanada.

On January 30, 2018, the Company as a reduction of royalties payable by Purdue.

Pursuant to the agreement, the royalty fromand Purdue to the Company terminates on the later of (a) the first date on which there is not at least one valid claim of the licensed patentsannounced that BELBUCA® was now commercially available in the territory covering any licensed product or (b) February 14th of the calendar year immediately following the first complete calendar year following the tenth anniversary ofCanada. The first commercial sale in which net sales total less than a predetermined amount.

On September 12, 2017, the Company announced Health Canada had granted market authorization to formally transfer the Drug Identification Number (DIN) ownership of BELBUCA®in Canada to Purdue. This approval triggered a milestone payment to the Company from Purdue in the amount of CAD 1 million (US $0.8 million), which wasthe Company received October 2017.and recognized as revenue in March 2018.

TTY license and supply agreement

On October 7, 2010, theThe Company announcedhas a license and supply agreement with TTY Biopharm Co., Ltd. (“TTY”) for the exclusive rights to develop and commercialize BEMA® Fentanyl in the Republic of China, Taiwan. The agreement results in potential milestone payments to

During the Company of up to $1.3 million, which include an upfront payment of $0.3 million that was received in 2010. In addition, the Company will receive an ongoing royalty based on net sales. TTY will be responsible for the regulatory filing of BEMA® Fentanyl in Taiwan as well as future commercialization in that territory. The term of the agreement with TTY is for the period from October 4, 2010 until the date fifteen years after first commercial sale unless the agreement is extended in writing or earlier terminated as provided for in the agreement.

In February, March,six months ended June August30, 2018 and September 2017, the Company received cumulative payments of $0.2 million, $0.03 million, $0.1 million, $0.2$0.9 million and $0.3$0.4 million, respectively, from TTY, which related to royalties based on product purchased in Taiwan by TTY of PAINKYL. Such payments of $0.5 million and $1.1 million are recorded in the accompanying condensed consolidated statements of operations for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017, respectively.

In February 2016 and June 2016, the Company received separate payments of $0.24 million each from TTY which is recorded in the accompanying condensed consolidated statementsstatement of operations for the nine months ended September 30, 2016. No such payments were received in the quarter ended September 30, 2016.operations.

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

10.Note payable (MidCap loan):

On May 29, 2015, the Company entered into a $30 million secured loan facility (the “Loan”) with MidCap Financial Trust, as agent and lender (“MidCap”), pursuant to the terms and conditions of that certain Amended and Restated Credit and Security Agreement, dated as of May 29, 2015 (the “Credit Agreement”), between the Company and MidCap (the “MidCap Credit Agreement”).8. Notes payable:

On February 21, 2017 (the “Closing Date”), the Company entered into a term loan agreement (the “Term Loan Agreement”) with CRG, as administrative agent and collateral agent, and the lenders named in the Term Loan Agreement (the “Lenders”). The Company utilized approximately $29.4 million of the initial loan proceeds under the Term Loan Agreement to repay all of the amounts owed by the Company under the MidCap Credit Agreement. Upon the repayment of all amounts owed by the Company under the MidCap Credit Agreement, all commitments under the MidCap Credit Agreement were terminated and all security interests granted by the Company and its subsidiary guarantors under the MidCap Credit Agreement were released (see note 11, Term Loan Agreement (CRG)). Certain warrants issued to MidCap and its affiliates in May 2016 related to the extension of the interest only period under the MidCap Credit Agreement remain outstanding as of September 30, 2017 and will expire, if not earlier exercised in May 2021. Such warrants are exercisable for 84,986 shares of Common Stock at an exercise price of $3.53 per share. During the nine months ended September 30, 2017, $0.7 million of deferred loan costs arising out of the MidCap Credit Agreement were expensed and recorded as interest expense in the accompanying condensed consolidated statement of operations.

11.Term loan agreement (CRG):

Pursuant to the Term Loan Agreement, the Company borrowed $45.0 million from the Lenders as of the Closing Date, and on December 26, 2017 borrowed an additional $15.0 million (the “Second Draw”) that was contingently available upon achievement of certain conditions. The Company may be eligible to borrow up to an additional $30.0 million in two tranches of $15.0 million each contingent upon achievement of certain conditions, including: (i) in the case of the first tranche, representing the second potential draw under the Loan Agreement (the “Second Draw”), satisfying both (a) certain minimum net revenue thresholds on or before September 30, 2017 or December 31, 2017 and (b) a certain minimum market capitalization threshold for a period of time prior to the funding of the Second Draw (provided, that if the Company does not achieve the minimum net revenue thresholds necessary for the Second Draw but does achieve a certain minimum market capitalization threshold for a period of time prior to December 31, 2017, the Company would be eligible for a Second Draw funding in the amount of $5.0 million); and (ii) in the case of the second tranche, representing the third potential draw under the Loan Agreement (the “Third Draw”), conditional upon satisfying both (a) certain minimum net revenue thresholds on or before June 30, 2018 or September 30, 2018 and (b) a certain minimum market capitalization threshold for a period of time prior to the funding of the Third Draw.

The Company has qualified for the Second Draw.

After the payoff of the MidCap Credit Agreement (see note 10), the Company is utilizing the initial proceeds under theoriginal Term Loan Agreement (after deducting loan origination costs and broker and other fees) of approximately $13.7 million, plus any additional amounts that may be borrowed in the future, for general corporate purposes and working capital.

The Term Loan Agreement hashada six-year term with three years of interest-only payments (whichpayments. On May 16, 2018, the Company entered into an amendment to its Term Loan Agreement with CRG. Pursuant to the amendment: (i) the interest only period of the Loan Agreement was extended by one year, and certain milestones previously required for the extended interest only period have been removed; (ii) the “PIK” period (under which a portion of the interest accrued under the Loan Agreement can be deferred to maturity) will also be extended to four yearsfor a year; (iii) amortization of the loan principal can be deferred until maturity (making the payment of the loan a “balloon” payment) if the Company achieves certain net revenue and maintains a market capitalization thresholdsof $200 million prior to December 31, 2019), afterthe conclusion of the interest only period (provided that if the Company achieves, and thereafter falls below a $200 million market capitalization, amortization of the loan principal will resume); and (iv) certain Company revenue targets, the failure of which quarterly principal and interest payments will be due throughwould create an event of default under the December 31, 2022 maturity date.loan, have been recalculated. Interest on the amounts borrowed under the Term Loan Agreement accrues at an annual fixed rate of 12.50%, 3.5% of which (i.e., a resultant 9.0% rate) may be deferred during the interest-only period by adding such amount to the aggregate principal loan amount. On each borrowing date (including the Closing Date), the Company is required to pay CRG a financing fee based on the loan drawn on that date. The Company is also required to pay the Lenders a final payment fee equivalent to 9% of the original loan amount upon repayment of the Loansloans in full, in addition to prepayment amounts described below.

The Company may prepay all or a portion of the outstanding principal and accrued unpaid interest under the Term Loan Agreement at any time upon prior notice to the Lenders subject to a certain prepayment fees during the first five years of the term (which fees are

lowered over time) and no prepayment fee thereafter. In certain circumstances, including a change of control and certain asset sales or licensing transactions, the Company is required to prepay all or a portion of the loan, including the applicable prepayment premium of on the amount of the outstanding principal to be prepaid.

As security for its obligations under the Term Loan Agreement, on the funding date of the initial borrowing, the Company and the Subsidiary Guarantors entered into a security agreement with CRG whereby the Company and the subsidiary guarantors of the Company under the Term Loan Agreement (the “Subsidiary Guarantors”) granted to CRG, as collateral agent for the Lenders, a lien on substantially all of its assets including intellectual property (subject to certain exceptions). The Term Loan Agreement requires the

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

8. Notes payable (continued):

 

11.Term loan agreement (CRG) (continued):

Company to maintain minimum cash and cash equivalents balance and, each year through the end of 2022, to meet a minimum net annual revenue threshold. The Company is in compliance as of September 30, 2017. In the event that the Company does not meet the minimum net annual revenue threshold, then the Company can satisfy the requirement for that year by raising two (2) times the shortfall by way of raising equity or subordinated debt.

The Term Loan Agreement also contains customary affirmative and negative covenants for a credit facility of this size and type, including covenants that limit or restrict the Company’s ability to, among other things (but subject in each case to negotiated exceptions), incur indebtedness, grant liens, merge or consolidate, dispose of assets, make investments, make acquisitions, enter into transactions with affiliates, pay dividends or make distributions, license intellectual property rights on an exclusive basis or repurchase stock.

The Term Loan Agreement includes customary events of default that include, among otherthings, non-payment, inaccuracy of representations and warranties, covenant breaches, a material adverse change (as defined in the Term Loan Agreement), cross default to material indebtedness or material agreements, bankruptcy and insolvency, material judgments and a change of control. The occurrence and continuance of an event of default could result in the acceleration of the obligations under the Term Loan Agreement. Under certain circumstances, a default interest rate of an additional 4.00% per annum will apply on all outstanding obligations during the existence of an event of default under the Term Loan Agreement.

The following table represents future maturities of the CRGnotes payable obligation as of SeptemberJune 30, 2017:2018:

 

2017

  $—   

2018

   —   

Years ending December 31, 2018

  $—  

2019

   —      —   

2020

   15,054    —   

2021

   15,054    30,347 

2022

   15,054    30,347 
  

 

   

 

 

Total maturities

  $45,162   $60,694 

Unamortized discount and loan costs

   (9,461   (11,300
  

 

   

 

 

Total CRG obligation

  $35,701 

Total notes payable obligation

  $49,394 
  

 

 

In connection with the initial borrowing made under the Term Loan Agreement, the Company issued to CRG and certain of its affiliates five separate warrants to purchase an aggregate of 1,701,583 shares of the Common Stock (the “CRG Warrants”). The CRG Warrants are exercisable any time prior to February 21, 2027 at a price of $2.38 per share, with typical provisions for cashless exercises. The exercise of the CRG Warrants could have a dilutive effect to the Common Stock to the extent that the market price per share of the Common Stock, as measured under the terms of the CRG Warrants, exceeds the exercise price of the CRG Warrants. CRG is also entitled to receive a smaller amount of similar warrants concurrently with the funding, if applicable, of the Second Draw and the Third Draw.9. Net sales by product:

12.Segment reporting:

The Company operates in a single industry engaging in the development and commercialization of pharmaceutical products principally in the areas of pain management and addiction. Accordingly, the Company’s business is classified as a single reportable segment.

TheHowever, the following table presents net sales by product (in thousands):product:

 

  Three months ended September 30,   Nine months ended September 30,   Three months ended June 30,   Six months ended June 30, 
  2017   2016   2017   2016   2018   2017   2018   2017 

BELBUCA®

  $6,437           $—           $17,554         $—           $9,746   $6,563  $17,770   $11,117

BUNAVAIL®

   1,681            2,009          6,244          6,221          1,020    1,323    2,834    4,563 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Net product sales

  $8,118           $2,009         $23,798         $6,221         $10,766   $7,886   $20,604   $15,680 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES10. Stockholders’ equity:

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

13.Stockholders’ equity:

Stock-based compensation

During the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2018, a total of 908,6611,643,296 options to purchase Common Stock, with an aggregate fair market value of approximately $1.8$2.4 million, were granted to Company employees. Options granted to employees have a term of 10 years from the grant date and vest ratably over a three yearthree-year period. Options granted to the Company’s Board of Directors have a term of 10 years from the grant date andone-half of those Options vest at grant date and the remaining half vest in one year. The fair value of each option is amortized as compensation expense evenly through the vesting period.

The Company’s stock-based compensation expense is allocated between research and development and selling, general and administrative as follows:

 

  Three months ended,   Nine months ended,   Three months ended,   Six months ended, 

Stock-based compensation expense

  September 30,
2017
   September 30,
2016
   September 30,
2017
   September 30,
2016
   June 30,
2018
   June 30,
2017
   June 30,
2018
   June 30,
2017
 

Research and Development

  $0.5           $0.5           $1.3           $2.1           $0.03   $0.4   $1.1   $0.8 

Selling, General and Administrative

  $3.7           $3.6           $8.9           $9.5           $1.1   $2.5   $2.9   $5.2 

The fair value of each option award is estimated on the grant date using the Black-Scholes valuation model that uses assumptions for expected volatility, expected dividends, expected term, and the risk-free interest rate. Expected volatilities are based on implied volatilities from historical volatility of the Common Stock, and other factors estimated over the expected term of the options.

Expected term of options granted is derived using the “simplified method” which computes expected term as the average of the sum of the vesting term plus contract term. The risk-free rate is based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant for the period of the expected term.

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

10. Stockholders’ equity (continued):

The weighted average for key assumptions used in determining the fair value of options granted during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 follows:

 

Expected price volatility

  78.68% -78.77%60.34%-68.77%

Risk-free interest rate

  1.77% -1.87%2.05%-2.82%

Weighted average expected life in years

  6 years

Dividend yield

  

Option activity during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 was as follows:

 

   Number of
Shares
  Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
Per Share
   Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
 

Outstanding at January 1, 2017

   3,468,991  $4.14   

Granted in 2017

     

Officers and Directors

   83,658   2.64   

Others

   825,003   1.91   

Exercised

   (151,373  2.07   

Forfeitures

   (1,183,795  5.89   
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

Outstanding at September 30, 2017

   3,042,484  $2.92   $1,466 
  

 

 

  

 

 

   

 

 

 
   Number of
shares
   Weighted average
exercise price per
share
   Aggregate
intrinsic
value
 

Outstanding at January 1, 2018

   2,712,954   $3.68   $1,190 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Granted in 2018:

      

Officers and Directors

   800,000    2.18   

Employees

   843,296    2.40   

Exercised

   (196,541   1.99   

Forfeitures

   (327,428   3.57   
  

 

 

     

Outstanding at June 30, 2018

   3,832,281   $3.18   $1,920 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

As of SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2018, options exercisable totaled 1,807,765.1,767,831. There was approximately $8.1$5.2 million of unrecognized compensation cost related tonon-vested share-based compensation awards, including options and restricted stock units (“RSUs”) granted. These costs will be expensed through 2020.

During the nine month ended September 31, 2017, an executive officer of the Company exercised approximately 0.15 million stock options, with net proceeds to the Company of approximately $0.3 million.

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

13.Stockholders’ equity (continued):

2021.

Restricted stock units

During the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017, 2,342,3152018, 1,410,611 RSUs were granted to the Company’s executive officers, employees and employees,directors, with a fair market value of approximately $4.5$3.1 million. The fair value of restricted units is determined using quoted market prices of the Common Stock and the number of shares expected to vest. These RSUs were issued under the Company’s 2011 Equity Incentive Plan, as amended. Of the aforementioned 2017 amended (the “EIP”).

RSU grants 2,060,000 areone-half either time-based andone-half are performance based andor performance-based, all of which generally vest over a three-year period. The performance-basedPerformance-based RSUs provide for vestingvest if specified predetermined net revenue and operating income goals are achieved with respect to the annual fiscal years 2017 through 2019.achieved. Actual performance relative to the predetermined performance measures are evaluated independently at the end of each fiscal year and the number of awards that will vest will be based upon the percentage of the individual performance measure achieved relative to the predetermined target. This allows for partial vesting relative to separate performance measures. Additionally, 120,000 RSUs

Restricted stock activity during the six months ended June 30, 2018 was as follows:

   Number of
restricted
shares
   Weighted
average fair
market value
per RSU
 

Outstanding at January 1, 2018

   4,706,895   $5.20 

Granted:

    

Executive officers

   1,038,434    2.23 

Directors

   55,000    1.95 

Employees

   317,177    2.10 

Vested

   (1,266,433   2.38 

Forfeitures

   (319,691   2.48 

Conversions

   (2,119,925   2.72 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Outstanding at June 30, 2018

   2,411,457   $8.02 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

10. Stockholders’ equity (continued):

Series B Preferred Stock Financing

On May 17, 2018, the Company entered into a placement agency agreement with William Blair & Company, L.L.C., as placement agent, relating to the Company’s registered direct offering, issuance and sale of an aggregate of 5,000 shares of the Company’s authorized preferred stock that the Board of Directors of the Company has designated asSeries B Non-Voting Convertible Preferred Stock, par value $.001 per share (the “Series B Preferred Stock”). All of the shares were grantedsold by the Company. The placement agency agreement contains customary representations, warranties and covenants of the Company and the Placement Agent. The closing of the offering was completed on May 21, 2018. The shares sold in the offering were issued pursuant to a shelf registration statement, as amended, that the Company employeesfiled with the SEC, which became effective on July 13, 2015.

Each share of Series B Preferred Stock is convertible into a number of shares of the Company’s common stock, par value $.001 per share determined by dividing $10,000 by a conversion price of $1.80 per share (subject to adjustment for stock splits and veststock dividends as provided in full in one year. Cumulatively, these RSUs were granted over the plan allotmentCertificate of our 2011 Equity Incentive Plan andDesignation) at any time following stockholder approval, which occurred at the annual shareholder meeting on August 2, 2018. As of the closing, the aggregate outstanding shares of Series B Preferred Stock will requirebe convertible (upon stockholder approval) into an aggregate 27,777,778 shares of Common Stock. The Series B Preferred Stock does not contain any price-based anti-dilution protection. The Series B Preferred Stock is convertible at any time after stockholder approval at the 2017 annual stockholder meeting. The remaining 162,315 RSUs were grantedoption of the holder, except that a holder will be prohibited from converting shares of Series B Preferred Stock into shares of Common Stock if, as a result of such conversion, such holder, together with its affiliates, would beneficially own more than 9.98% of the total number of shares of Common Stock then issued and outstanding, which percentage may be increased or decreasedon sixty-one (61) days’ notice from the holder of Series B Preferred Stock to the Company’s BoardCompany provided that, until stockholder approval, such beneficial ownership limitation may only be increased to up to 19.99% of Directorsthe total number of shares of Common Stock then issued andone-half outstanding.

Within ten (10) days following the date of those RSUs vest at grant datestockholder approval, the Company has the right to deliver a notice to the holders of the Series B Preferred Stock to require conversion of the Series B Preferred Stock into Common Stock, provided that certain conditions with respect to the Common Stock are satisfied. Such forced conversion shall be subject to a holder’s beneficial ownership limitation of 9.98% of the total number of shares of Common Stock then issued and outstanding. Following an initial forced conversion of the remaining half vest in one year. Cumulatively, these RSUs were also granted overSeries B Preferred Stock, every ninety (90) days thereafter, the plan allotmentCompany has the right to require the forced conversion of our 2011 Equity Incentive Planthe still outstanding shares of Series B Preferred Stock up to the beneficial ownership limitation of 9.98% of the total number of shares of Common Stock then issued and will require approval at the 2017 annual stockholder meeting.outstanding.

   Number of
Restricted
Shares
   Weighted
Average Fair
Market Value
Per RSU
 

Outstanding at January 1, 2017

   4,584,297   $7.29 

Granted:

    

Executive officers

   1,640,000    1.80 

Directors

   162,315    2.80 

Employees

   540,000    2.04 

Vested

   (1,568,042   2.17 

Forfeitures

   (554,675   2.28 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Outstanding at September 30, 2017

   4,803,895   $5.14 
  

 

 

   

 

 

 

Warrants

The Company has granted warrants to purchase shares of Common Stock.

The fair value of each warrant grant is estimated on the grant date using the Black-Scholes valuation model that uses assumptions for expected volatility, expected dividends, expected term, and the risk-free interest rate. Expected volatilities are based on implied volatilities from historical volatility of the Common Stock, and other factors estimated over the expected term of the warrants.

Expected term of warrants granted is derived using the “simplified method” which computes expected term as the average of the sum of the vesting term plus contract term. The risk-free rate is based on the U.S. Treasury yield curve in effect at the time of grant for the period of the expected term. TheA cumulative total of 2,136,020 shares underlying warrants to purchase Common Stock are outstanding as of June 30, 2018 with a weighted average for key assumptions used in determining the fair valueexercise price of warrants granted during the nine months ended September 30, 2017 follows:$2.60 per share.

Expected price volatility

78.39%

Risk-free interest rate

1.92%

Weighted average expected life in years

6 years

Dividend yield

—  

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

13.Stockholders’ equity (continued):

 

Warrant activity during the nine months ended September 30, 2017 was as follows:11. Earnings per common share:

   Number of
Shares
   Weighted
Average
Exercise
Price
Per Share
   Aggregate
Intrinsic
Value
 

Outstanding at January 1, 2017

   84,986   $3.53   

Granted in 2017

   1,701,583    2.38   

Exercised

   —      —     

Forfeitures

   —      —     
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

Outstanding at September 30, 2017

   1,786,569   $2.43   $970 
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

14.Earnings per common share:

The following table reconciles the numerators and denominators of the basic and diluted lossearnings per common share computations (in thousands, except share and per share data).

 

  Three Months Ended
September 30,
 Nine Months Ended
September 30,
   Three Months Ended
June 30,
   Six Months Ended
June 30,
 
  2017 2016 2017   2016   2018   2017   2018   2017 

Basic:

              

Net income (loss)

  $(11,951 $(15,977 $21,495   $(51,196

Net (loss) income

  $(9,770  $(14,879  $(20,479  $33,446 

Weighted average common shares outstanding

   55,604,708  53,767,099  55,170,569    53,531,770    59,400,317    55,388,774    58,735,351    54,949,901 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Basic income (loss) per common share

  $(0.21 $(0.30 $0.39   $(0.96

Basic (loss) income per common share

  $(0.16  $(0.27  $(0.35  $0.61 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Diluted:

              

Effect of dilutive securities:

              

Net income (loss)

  $(11,951 $(15,977 $21,495   $(51,196

Net (loss) income

  $(9,770  $(14,879  $(20,479  $33,446 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Weighted average common shares outstanding

   55,604,708  53,767,099  55,170,569    53,531,770    59,400,317    55,388,774    58,735,351    54,949,901 

Effect of dilutive options and warrants

   —     —    1,033,789    —      —      —      —      886,868
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding

   55,604,708  53,767,099  56,204,358    53,531,770    59,400,317    55,388,774    58,735,351    55,836,769 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Diluted income (loss) per common share

  $(0.21 $(0.30 $0.38   $(0.96

Diluted (loss) income per common share

  $(0.16  $(0.27  $(0.35  $0.60 
  

 

  

 

  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Basic earnings per common share is calculated using the weighted average shares of Common Stock outstanding during the period. In addition to the weighted average shares of Common Stock outstanding, common equivalent shares from stock options, RSUs, warrants and warrantspreferred shares using the treasury stock method, are included in the diluted per share calculations unless the effect of inclusion would be antidilutive. During the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and 2016,2017, outstanding stock options, RSUs, warrants and warrantspreferred shares of 9,638,21123,849,633 and 9,986,447,10,037,017, respectively, were not included in the computation of diluted earnings per common share, because to do so would have had an antidilutive effect. During the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and 2016,2017, outstanding stock options, RSUs, warrants and warrantspreferred shares of 5,230,17917,334,492 and 10,196,872,7,747,726, respectively, were not included in the computation of diluted earnings per common share, because to do so would have had an antidilutive effect. Included in the three and six months ended June 30, 2018 are the Series B shares as converted to common stock.

12. Commitments and contingencies:

15.Retirement agreement:

On August 23, 2017,The Company is involved from time to time in routine legal matters incidental to our business. Based upon available information, the Company and Mark A. Sirgo,believes that the Company’s Vice Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer (“Sirgo”), executedresolution of such matters will not have a Retirement Agreement (“Retirement Agreement”) memorializing the termsmaterial adverse effect on its condensed consolidated financial position or results of Sirgo’s voluntary retirement fromoperations. Except as discussed below, the Company which will be effective January 2, 2018 (the “Retirement Date”, withis not the period from August 23, 2017subject of any pending legal proceedings and, to the Retirement Date being referred to herein as the “Transition Period”). During the Transition Period and following the Retirement Date, Sirgo will continue to serve as Vice Chairmanknowledge of the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board”).

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

15.Retirement agreement (continued):

Pursuant to the Retirement Agreement, Sirgo will continue to serve as the Company’s President and Chief Executive Officer during the Transition Period. By entering into the Retirement Agreement, the Company and Sirgo agreed to terminate Sirgo’s employment agreement with the Company, dated August 24, 2004, as amended by that First Amendment thereto (collectively with the related confidentiality agreement between the Company and Sirgo, the “Employment Agreement”) as of the Retirement Date, subject to those provisions of the Employment Agreement which survive termination (as the same were modified by the Retirement Agreement), including provisions related to confidentiality,non-solicitation andnon-competition.

In connection with his retirement from the Company, and in consideration of his service to the Company (and in lieu of any similar benefits provided for in the Employment Agreement), Sirgo has received or will receive the following benefit pursuant to the Retirement Agreement:

(i)a cash payment of $0.8 million (less applicable withholdings) which was paid by September 5, 2017;

(ii)an additional cash payment equal to $0.8 million (less applicable withholdings) to be paid on January 15, 2018; and

(iii)an additional potential cash payment of $0.2 million (less applicable withholdings) as provided for in Section 2(a) of the Retirement Agreement.

In addition, pursuant to the Retirement Agreement:

(i)as of the Retirement Date, all previously vested options held by Sirgo to purchase shares of Common Stock will continue for the life of such options (as opposed to such options terminating on the 90 th day following the Retirement Date, as provided for in the Company’s 2011 Equity Incentive Plan, as amended (the “Plan”));

(ii)Sirgo will be entitled to receive his ordinary year end equity bonus award (in the form of RSUs) for his service as an officer of the Company during 2017, as determined by the Compensation Committee of the Board (the “2017 Equity Award”); provided, however, that (A) with respect to RSUs which by their terms would vest with the passage of time (“Time Vesting RSUs”), Sirgo shall receive a number of shares of Common Stock equal to (1) the Net Present Value (as defined in the Retirement Agreement) of the Time Vesting RSUs that would have been issued to Sirgo for the 2017 Equity Award had he not retired divided by (2) the30-day volume weighted average price of the Common Stock (the“30-day VWAP”) as of the date of issuance of the 2017 Equity Bonus; and (B) with respect to RSUs which by their terms would vest based on future performance (“Performance Vesting RSUs”), Sirgo shall receive a number of shares of Common Stock determined by multiplying the number of Performance Vesting RSUs that would have been issued to Sirgo for the 2017 Equity Award had he not retired by 0.66;

(iii)as of the Retirement Date, all previously granted Time Vesting RSUs issued to Sirgo pursuant to the Plan that are unvested as of the Retirement Date shall terminate and, in lieu thereof, Sirgo shall receive aone-time issuance of fully vested shares of Common Stock under the Plan, the number of which will be determined with reference to the Time Vesting RSUs being terminated by dividing (A) the Net Present Value of such Time Vesting RSUs by (B) the30-day VWAP as of the Retirement Date, and all previously granted RSUs issued to Sirgo pursuant to the Plan which vest due to achievement of future performance milestones that are unvested as of the Retirement Date shall terminate and, in lieu thereof, Sirgo shall receive aone-time issuance of 250,000 fully vested shares of Common Stock under the Plan; and

(iv)Sirgo will continue to be entitled to receive (if applicable) one hundred percent (100%) of his regular award of vested Common Stock (the “LTIP Stock”) under the Company’s Performance Long Term Incentive Plan (the “ LTIP”), with the amount of such LTIP Stock to be determined and issued in accordance with the terms and provisions of the LTIP. The issuance of the LTIP Stock to Sirgo as provided for above shall occur, if applicable, concurrently with the issuance of LTIP Stock to the Company’s officers, but no later than March 15, 2018. Should Sirgo (i) voluntarily resign from his officer positions with the Company prior to the Retirement Date or (ii) voluntarily resign from the Board, in each case prior to payment of any amount of LTIP Stock, Sirgo’s right to receive LTIP Stock from and after that time shall terminate. In the event a Change in Control (as defined in the Retirement Agreement) occurs on or within twelve

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

15.Retirement agreement (continued):

(12) months following the Retirement Date with a company with whom Sirgo had contact about a potential transaction in his capacity as an employee of the Company prior to the Retirement Date, then the Company shall issue to Sirgo, as an additional retirement benefit, fully vested shares of Common Stock in an amount equal to the number of shares Sirgo would have received pursuant to the LTIP had he remained employed with the Company through the Change in Control.

For purposes of this Agreement, the term “Change of Control” means the occurrence of any one or more of the following events (it being agreed that, with respect to paragraphs (i) and (iii) of this definition below, a “Change of Control” shall not be deemed to have occurred if the applicable third party acquiring party is an “affiliate” of the Company within the meaning of Rule 405 promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended):

(i) an acquisition (whether directly from the Company or otherwise) of any voting securities of the Company (the “ Voting Securities ”) by any “Person” (as the term person is used for purposes of Section 13(d) or 14(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “ 1934 Act ”)), immediately after which such Person has “Beneficial Ownership” (within the meaning of Rule 13d-3 promulgated under the 1934 Act) of forty percent (40%) or more of the combined voting power of the Company’s then outstanding Voting Securities.

(ii) the individuals who, as of the date hereof,management, no proceedings are members of the Company’s Board of Directors cease, by reason of a financing, merger, combination, acquisition, takeover or other non-ordinary course transaction affecting the Company, to constitute at least fifty-one percent (51%) of the members of the Board of Directors; or

(iii) approval by the Board of Directors and, if required, stockholders of the Company, or execution by the Company of any definitive agreement with respect to, or the consummation of (it being understood that the mere execution of a term sheet, memorandum of understanding or other non-binding document shall not constitute a Change of Control):

(A) a merger, consolidation or reorganization involving the Company, where either or both of the events described in clauses (i) or (ii) above would be the result;

(B) a liquidation or dissolution of or appointment of a receiver, rehabilitator, conservator or similar person for, or the filing by a third party of an involuntary bankruptcy against, the Company; or

(C) an agreement for the sale or other disposition of all or substantially all of the assets of the Company to any Person (other than a transfer to a subsidiary of the Company).”

If the Retirement Date occurs after there has been a Change in Control, an additional cash payment equal to $0.2 million (less applicable withholdings) (the “CIC Retirement Payment”) to be paid in lump sum within ten (10) days of the Retirement Date, and (iv) if a Change in Control occurs on or after the Retirement Date and within twelve (12) months following the Retirement Date, with a company with whom Sirgo had contact about a potential transaction in his capacity as an employee of the Company prior to the Retirement Date, then the Company shall pay to Sirgo an additional amount equal to $0.2 million (less applicable withholdings) (the “Additional Retirement Payment”) in lump sum on the closing of the Change in Control.

The Retirement Agreement also contains other customary provisions, including provisions for Sirgo’s continuing participation in certain Company employee benefit plans, mutual releases of claims by the Company and Sirgo (subject to certain exceptions) and a covenant of cooperation.

16.Commitments and contingencies:

Litigation related to ONSOLIS®

On November 2, 2010, MonoSol Rx LLC (“MonoSol”) filed an actionpresently contemplated against the Company by any federal, state or local governmental agency.

Indivior (formerly RB Pharmaceuticals Ltd.) and its commercial partners for ONSOLIS® in the Federal District Court of New Jersey (the “DNJ”) for alleged patent infringement and false marking. The Company was formally served in this matter on January 19, 2011.Aquestive Therapeutics (formerly MonoSol claimed that our manufacturing process for ONSOLIS®, which has

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

16.Commitments and contingencies (continued):

never been disclosed publicly and which the Company and its partners maintain as a trade secret, infringes its patent (United States Patent No. 7,824,588) (the “’588 Patent”). Of note, the BEMA® technology itself was not at issue in the case, nor is BELBUCA® or BUNAVAIL®, but rather only the manner in which ONSOLIS®, which incorporates the BEMA® technology, is manufactured. Pursuant to its complaint, MonoSol was seeking an unspecified amount of damages, attorney’s fees and an injunction preventing future infringement of MonoSol’s patents.

Based on the Company’s original assertion that its proprietary manufacturing process for ONSOLIS® does not infringe on patents held by MonoSol, and the denial and subsequent narrowing of the claims on the two reissued patents MonoSol has asserted against the Company while the third has had all claims rejected by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), the Company remains confident in its original stated position regarding this matter. Thus far, the Company has proven that the “original” MonoSol’s US patent No 7,357,891 (the “’891 Patent”), and No 7,425,292 (the “’292 Patent”) in light of their reissuance with fewer and narrower claims were indeed invalid and the third and final patent, the ’588 patent, was invalid as well with all its claims cancelled. Given the outcomes of the ’292, ’891 and ’588 reexamination proceedings, at a January 22, 2015 status meeting, the Court decided to lift the stay and grant the Company’s request for the case to proceed on an expedited basis with a Motion for Summary Judgment to dismiss the action. On September 25, 2015, the Honorable Freda L. Wolfson granted the Company’s motion for summary judgment and ordered the case closed. The Company was found to be entitled to absolute intervening rights as to both patents in suit, the ’292 and ’891 patents and the Company’s ONSOLIS® product is not liable for infringing the patents prior to July 3, 2012 and August 21, 2012, respectively. In October 2015, MonoSol appealed the decision of the court to the Federal Circuit. The Company had no reason to believe the outcome would be different and were prepared to vigorously defend the appeal. MonoSol, however, subsequently decided to withdraw the appeal. On February 25, 2016, MonoSol filed an Unopposed Motion For Voluntary Dismissal Of Appeal, which was granted by the court on February 26, 2016 and the case dismissed. Thus, the district court’s grant of the Summary Judgement of Intervening Rights stands. The possibility exists that MonoSol could file another suit alleging infringement of the ’292 and ’891 patents. The Company continues to believe, however, that ONSOLIS® and its other products relying on the BEMA® technology, including BUNAVAIL® and BELBUCA®, do not infringe any amended, reexamined claim from either patent.Rx)

Litigation related to BUNAVAIL®

On October 29, 2013,September 22, 2014, Reckitt Benckiser, Inc., RB Pharmaceuticals Limited, and MonoSolAquestive Therapeutics, Inc. (“Aquestive”) (collectively, the RB Plaintiffs) filed an action against the Company relating to its BUNAVAIL® product in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina (“EDNC”“RB Plaintiffs”) for alleged patent infringement. BUNAVAIL® is a drug approved for the maintenance treatment of opioid dependence. The RB Plaintiffs claim that the formulation for BUNAVAIL®, which has never been disclosed publicly, infringes its patent (United States Patent No. 8,475,832) (the “’832 Patent”). On May 21, 2014, the Court granted the Company’s motion to dismiss. In doing so, the Court dismissed the case in its entirety. The RB Plaintiffs did not appeal the Court Decision by the June 21, 2014 due date and therefore, the dismissal will stand and the RB Plaintiffs lose the ability to challenge the Court Decision in the future. The possibility exists, however, that the RB Plaintiffs could file another suit alleging infringement of the ’832 Patent. If this occurs, based on the Company’s original position that its BUNAVAIL® product does not infringe the ’832 Patent, the Company would defend the case vigorously (as the Company has done so previously), and the Company anticipates that such claims against them ultimately would be rejected.

On September 20, 2014, based upon the Company’s position and belief that its BUNAVAIL® product does not infringe any patents owned by the RB Plaintiffs, the Company proactively filed a declaratory judgment action in the EDNC, requesting the Court to make a determination that its BUNAVAIL® product does not infringe the RB Plaintiffs’ ’832 Patent, US Patent No. 7,897,080 (“’080 Patent”) and US Patent No. 8,652,378 (“’378 Patent”). With the declaratory judgment, there is an automatic stay in proceedings. The RB Plaintiffs may request that the stay be lifted, but they have the burden of showing that the stay should be lifted. For the ’832 Patent, the January 15, 2014interpartes review (“IPR”) was instituted and in June 2015, all challenged claims were rejected for both anticipation and obviousness. In August 2015, the RB Plaintiffs filed an appeal to the Federal Circuit. The Federal Circuit affirmed the USPTO’s decision, and the RB Plaintiffs then filed a Petition for Panel Rehearing and for Rehearing En Banc, which was denied. A mandate issued on October 25, 2016, pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, meaning that a petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court is no longer possible for the RB Plaintiffs. The ’832 IPR was finally resolved with the invalidation of claims15-19. For the ’080 Patent, all claims have been rejected in an inter partes reexamination and the rejection of all claims as invalid over the prior art has been affirmed on appeal by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) in a decision dated March 27, 2015. In May 2015, the RB Plaintiffs filed a response after the decision to which we filed comments. In December 2015, the PTAB denied MonoSol’s request to reopen prosecution, but provided MonoSol an opportunity to file a corrected response. MonoSol filed the request in December 2015 and we subsequently filed comments on

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

16.Commitments and contingencies (continued):

December 23, 2015. The PTAB issued a communication on July 7, 2016 denying MonoSol’s request to reopen prosecution of the rejections of all claims over the prior art. On January 31, 2017, the PTAB issued a final decision maintaining an additional new ground of rejection in addition to the previous grounds of invalidity. As such, all claims remain finally rejected on multiple grounds. MonoSol failed to appeal the final decision and all claims were cancelled in a reexamination certificate issued May 9, 2017. For the ’378 Patent, an IPR was filed on June 1, 2014, but an IPR was not instituted. However, in issuing its November 5, 2014 decision not to institute the IPR, the PTAB construed the claims of the ’378 Patent narrowly. As in prior litigation proceedings, we believe these IPR and the reexamination filings will provide support for maintaining the stay until the IPR and reexamination proceedings conclude. Indeed, given the PTAB’s narrow construction of the claims of the ’378 Patent, we filed a motion to withdraw the ’378 Patent from the case on December 12, 2014. In addition, we also filed a joint motion to continue the stay (with RB Plaintiffs) in the proceedings on the same day. Both the motion to withdraw the ’378 Patent from the proceedings and motion to continue the stay were granted.

On September 22, 2014, the RB Plaintiffs filed an action against the Company (and itsthe Company’s commercial partner) relating to itsthe Company’s BUNAVAIL®product in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey for alleged patent infringement. The RB Plaintiffs claim that BUNAVAIL®, whose formulation and manufacturing processes have never been disclosed publicly, infringes its patent U.S. Patent No. 8,765,167 (“’167(the “‘167 Patent”). As with prior actions by the RB Plaintiffs, theThe Company believes this is anotheran anticompetitive attempt by the RB Plaintiffs to distract ourthe Company’s efforts from commercializing BUNAVAIL®. The Company strongly refutes as without merit the RB Plaintiffs’ assertion of patent infringement and will vigorously defend the lawsuit. On December 12, 2014, the Company filed a motion to transfer the case from New Jersey to North Carolina and a motion to dismiss the case against ourits commercial partner. The Court issued an opinion on July 21, 2015 granting the Company’s motion to transfer the venue to the ENDCUnited States District for the Eastern District of North Carolina (“EDNC”) but denying itsthe Company’s motion to dismiss the case against the Company’s commercial partner as moot. The Company has also filed a Joint Motion to stayStay the case in North Carolinathe EDNC at the end of April 2016, which was granted by the court on May 5, 2016. Thus, the case is now stayed until a final resolution of the ‘167 IPRsPatentinter partesreview (“IPR”) in the USPTO. The Company will continue to vigorously defend this case in the EDNC.United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”).

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

12. Commitments and contingencies (continued):

In a related matter, on October 28, 2014, the Company filed multiple IPR requestspetitions on the ’167 Patent demonstrating that certain claims of such patent were anticipated by or obvious in light of prior art references, including prior art references not previously considered by the USPTO, and thus, invalid.‘167 Patent. The USPTO instituted three of the four IPR requestspetitions. The PTAB upheld the claims and denied collateral estoppel applied to the Company filed a request for rehearing for thenon-instituted IPR. The finalPTAB decisions finding all claims patentable were issued in March 2016 and the2016. The Company filed a Request for Reconsideration in the USPTO in April 2016, which was denied in September 2016 and appealed to Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The USPTO intervened with respect to whether collateral estoppel applied to the PTAB. The Federal Circuit (the “Federal Circuit”)did not issue an affirmance without opinion after the February 7, 2018 oral argument. On June 19, 2018, the Company filed a motion to remand the case for further consideration by the PTAB in November 2016. The appeal is currently proceeding inview of intervening authority. On July 31, 2018, the Federal Circuit with final briefing completed August 7, 2017vacated the decisions, and oral argument pending. Regardless ofremanded the outcome of‘167 Patent IPRs for further consideration on the appeal, the Company believes that BUNAVAILmerits.

Litigation related to BELBUCA® will be found not to infringe the claims of the ’167 patent.

On January 13, 2017, MonoSolAquestive filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey alleging BELBUCA® infringes the ‘167 patent.Patent. In lieu of answering the complaint, the Company filed motions to dismiss the complaint and, in the alternative, to transfer the case to the EDNC on March 1, 2017 of which briefing on the motions was completed.EDNC. Briefing on the motions was completed on June 21, 2017. On July 25, 2017, the New Jersey Court administratively terminated the case pending the parties submission of a joint stipulation of transfer because the District of New Jersey was an inappropriate venue. This case has beenwas later transferred to the Delaware District Court. On October 31, 2017, the Company filed motions to dismiss the complaint and, in the alternative, to transfer the case to the EDNC. Briefing on the motions was completed on December 8, 2017. The Company anticipates receiving a decision on the motions from the Delaware District Court by the 4th quarter of 2018 or the 1st quarter of 2019. The Company strongly refutes as without merit MonoSol’sAquestive’s assertion of patent infringement and will vigorously defend the lawsuit.

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA (formerly Actavis)

On February 8, 2016, the Company received a notice relating to a Paragraph IV certification from Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc. (“Actavis”) seeking to find invalid three Orange Book listed patents (the “BUNAVAIL® Patents”) relating specifically to BUNAVAIL®. The Paragraph IV certification relates to an Abbreviated New Drug Application (the “ANDA”) filed by Actavis with the FDA for a generic formulation of BUNAVAIL®. The BUNAVAIL®Patents subject to Actavis’ certification are U.S. Patent Nos. 7,579,019 (the “’019 Patent”), 8,147,866 (the “’866 Patent”) and 8,703,177 (the “’177 Patent”). Under the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 (the “Hatch-Waxman Amendments”), after receipt of a valid Paragraph IV notice, the Company may, and in this case did, bring a patent infringement suit in federal district court against Actavis within 45 days from the date of receipt of the certification notice. On March 18, 2016, the Company filed a complaint in Delaware against Actavis, thus the Company is entitled to receive a 30 month stay on the FDA’s ability to give final approval to any proposed products that reference BUNAVAIL®. The 30 month stay is expected to preempt any final approval by the FDA on Actavis’ ANDA until at least August of 2018.

The Company asserted three different patents against Actavis, the ’019 Patent, the ’866 Patent, and the ’177 Patent. Actavis did not raisenon-infringement positions with regard to the ’019 Patent and the ’866 Patent in its Paragraph IV certification. Actavis did raise anon-infringement position on the ’177 Patent due to its assertion that the backing layer for its generic product does not have a pH

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

16.Commitments and contingencies (continued):

within the claimed range claimed in the patent. The Company asserted in its complaint that Actavis infringed the ’177 Patent either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents.

The Company believes that Actavis is unlikely to prevail on its claims that the ’019, ’866, and ’177 Patents are invalid, and, as the Company has done in the past, intends to vigorously defend its intellectual property. Each of the three patents carries the presumption of validity, and the ’019 Patent has already been the subject of an unrelated IPR before the USPTO under which the Company prevailed, and all claims of the ’019 Patent survived. IPR petitioner MonoSol’s request for rehearing of the final IPR decision regarding the ’019 Patent was denied by the USPTO on December 19, 2016. MonoSol did not appeal and the decision is final.

On December 20, 2016, the USPTO issued U.S. Patent No. 9,522,188 (“the “’188 Patent”), and this patent was properly listed in the Orange Book as covering the BUNAVAIL® product. On February 23, 2017, Actavis sent a Paragraph IV certification adding the ’188 Patent to its ANDA. The Company amended the complaint to add the ’188 Patent to the current litigation.

On January 31, 2017, the Company received a notice relating to a Paragraph IV certification from Teva Pharmaceuticals USA (“Teva”) relating to Teva’s ANDA on additional strengths of BUNAVAIL®. Teva’s parent company, Teva Pharmaceuticals Ltd., recently acquired Actavis through an acquisition. On March 16, 2017, the Company brought suit against Teva and its parent company on these additional strengths within 45 days from the receipt of the notice in Delaware. As in the original case brought by Actavis, the Company is again entitled to receive a 30 month stay on the FDA’s ability to give final approval to any proposed products that reference the additional strengths of BUNAVAIL®. The 30 month stay is expected to extend until at least August of 2019. On June 20, 2017, the Court entered orders staying both BUNAVAIL® suits at the request of the parties.

On May 23, 2017, the USPTO issued U.S. Patent 9,655,843 (the “’843 Patent”), and this patent was properly listed in the Orange Book as covering the BUNAVAIL® product.

On October 12, 2017, the Company announced that it had entered into a settlement agreement with Teva that resolved the Company’s BUNAVAIL® patent litigation against Teva pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. As part of the Settlement Agreement, which is subject to review by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice, the Company has entered into anon-exclusive license agreement with Teva that permits Teva to first begin selling its generic version of BUNAVAIL® in the U.S. on July 23, 2028 or earlier under certain circumstances. Other terms of the agreement are confidential.

Litigations related to BELBUCA®

The Company received notices regarding Paragraph IV certifications from Teva on November 8, 2016, November 10, 2016, and December 22, 2016, seeking to find invalid two Orange Book listed patents (the “BELBUCA®Patents”) relating specifically to BELBUCA®. The Paragraph IV certifications relaterelated to three ANDAs filed by Teva with the FDA for a generic formulation of BELBUCA®. The BELBUCA®Patentspatents subject to Teva’s certification are the ’019were U.S. Patent No. 7,579,019 (the “‘019 Patent”) and the ’866 Patent.U.S. Patent No. 8,147,866 (the “‘866 Patent”) . Under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments, after receipt of a valid Paragraph IV notice, the Company may, and in this case did, bringbrought a patent infringement suit in federal district court against Teva USA within 45 days from the date of receipt of the certification notice. The Company filed complaints in Delaware against Teva on December 22, 2016 and February 3, 2017, thus the Company iswas entitled to receive a 30

month stay on the FDA’s ability to give final approval to any proposed products that reference BELBUCA®. The 30 month30-month stay iswas expected to preempt any final approval by the FDA on Teva’s ANDA Nos. 209704 and 209772 until at least May of 2019 and for Teva’s ANDA No. 209807 until at least June of 2019.

TheIn February 2018, the Company has asserted two different patents againstannounced that it had entered into a settlement agreement with Teva that resolved the ’019 Patent and the ’866 Patent. Teva did not contest infringement of the claims of the ’019 Patent and also did not contest infringement of the claims of the ’866 Patent that coverCompany’s BELBUCA® patent litigation against Teva pending in its Paragraph IV certifications.

The Company believes that Tevathe U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. As part of the settlement agreement, which is unlikelysubject to prevail on its claims thatreview by the ’019U.S. Federal Trade Commission and ’866 Patents are invalid, and, asthe U.S. Department of Justice, the Company has done in the past, intends to vigorously defend its intellectual property. Both of the patents carry the presumption of validity, and the ’019 Patent has already been the subject of an unrelated IPR before the USPTO undergranted Teva anon-exclusive license (for which the Company prevailed, and all claimswill receive no current or future payments) that permits Teva to first begin selling the generic version of the ’019 Patent survived. IPR Petitioner MonoSol’s requestCompany’s BELBUCA® product in the U.S. on January 23, 2027 or earlier under certain circumstances (including, for rehearingexample, upon (i) the delisting of the final IPR decisionpatents-in-suit from the U.S. FDA Orange Book, (ii) the granting of a license by us to a third party to launch another generic form of BELBUCA® at a date prior to January 23, 2027, or (iii) the occurrence of certain conditions regarding the ’019 Patent was denied by the USPTO on December 19, 2016. MonoSol did not file a timely appeal at the Federal Circuit.BELBUCA® market share).

2018 Arkansas Opioid Litigation

On May 23, 2017,March 15, 2018, the USPTO issued U.S. Patent 9,655,843 (the “’843 Patent”State of Arkansas, and certain counties and cities in that State, filed an action in the Circuit Court of Arkansas, Crittenden County against multiple manufacturers, distributors, retailers, and prescribers of opioid analgesics, including our Company. The Company was served with the complaint on April 27, 2018. The complaint specifically alleged that the Company licensed its branded fentanyl buccal soluble film ONSOLIS®to Collegium Pharmaceutical Inc. (“Collegium”), and this patent was properly listedCollegium is also named as a defendant in the Orange Book as covering the BELBUCAlawsuit. ONSOLIS® product.is not presently sold in the United States and the license agreement with Collegium was terminated prior to Collegium launching ONSOLIS® in the United States. Therefore, on June 28, 2018, the Company moved to dismiss the case against them and most recently, on July 6, 2018, the plaintiffs filed a notice to voluntarily dismiss the Company from the Arkansas case, without prejudice.

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(U.S. DOLLARS, IN THOUSANDS)

(Unaudited)

 

A five (5) day bench trial is currently scheduled to begin on November 19, 2018.13. Subsequent events:

On August 28, 2017,2, 2018, in connection with the Court entered orders staying both BELBUCA® suits atCompany’s 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders (the “Meeting”), the requestCompany’s stockholders approved, among other matters, the following;

The Company’s Certificate of Incorporation was amended to increase the number of authorized shares of Common Stock from 75,000,000 to 125,000,000; and

The ratification of the parties. On October 18, 2017, the Court entered orders continuing the stay in both BELBUCA® suits at the requestissuance and sale of the parties.

17.Subsequent events:

On October 5, 2017,Company’s Series B Preferred Stock, par value $.001 per share, and the Company entered into a subsequent party acknowledgement relating to its participation inissuance of Common Stock issuable upon the Opioid PMR Consortium (the “OPC”). The participants are member companies, collectively undertaking various observational and clinical studies in order to satisfy certain post-marketing requirements by the FDA as holders of a NDA for extended-release and long-acting opioid analgesics. As a requirement of joining the OPC, the Company was required to pay its shareconversion of the previous expenses incurredSeries B Preferred Stock as required by and funded by the existing member companies. The Company’spro-rata share of such expenses totals approximately $4.2 million, which will be paid during the fourth quarter of 2017. Ongoing expenses will be shared equally by the member companies and paid monthly for the remainder of 2017 through 2020.in accordance with NASDAQ Marketplace Rule 5635(d).

Item 2.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto included elsewhere in this Quarterly Report. This discussion contains certain forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results and the timing of certain events could differ materially from those discussed in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, including, but not limited to, those set forth herein and elsewhere in this Quarterly Report and in our other filings with the SEC. See “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward Looking Statements” below.

Overview

Strategy

We are a specialty pharmaceutical company that is developing and commercializing, either on our own or in partnerships with third parties, new applications of approved therapeutics to address important unmet medical needs using both proven and new drug delivery technologies. We have developed and are continuing to develop pharmaceutical products aimed principally in the areas of pain management and addiction.

Our strategy is to:

 

Focus our commercial and development efforts in the areas of pain management and addiction within the U.S. pharmaceutical marketplace;

 

Market our products through specialty sales teams by primarily focusing on high-prescribing U.S. physicians working with patients in the pain and addiction space; and

Identify and acquire rights to products that we believe have potential for near-term regulatory approval through the 505(b)(2) approval process of the FDAU.S Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) or are already FDA approved;

approved,

Market our products through specialty sales teams by primarily focusing on high-prescribing U.S. physicians working with patients in the pain and addiction space.

We believe this strategy will allow us to increase our revenues, improve our margins andas we seek profitability and enhance stockholder value.

ThirdSecond Quarter and Recent Highlights

 

On July 12, 2017, we, along with Purdue Pharma (Canada) announced that we have signed an exclusive agreement for the licensing, distribution, marketing and sale of BELBUCA® in Canada. In return for the licensing and distribution rights to BELBUCA® in Canada, we are eligible to receive upfront and potential milestones of up to CAD 4.5 million as well as royalties on net sales.

On May 7, 2018, we announced the appointment of Herm Cukier as our new Chief Executive Officer and member of our board of directors, effective as of May 8, 2018.

 

On August 17, 2017, we announced that we would present three posters reviewing the potential impacts of BELBUCA® and BUNAVAIL® on important issues pertinent to the opioid epidemic, such as safety and diversion, at the PAINWeek 2017 meeting in Las Vegas, NV on September 5 - 9, 2017.

On May 17, 2018, we announced that we had entered into an agreement with an affiliate of Broadfin Capital LLC (“Broadfin”), a large BDSI stockholder, to reconstitute our Board of Directors and to significantly strengthen our financial position. The closing of this agreement was subject to and effective upon the closing of our $50 million equity financing described below.

 

On September 12, 2017, we announced that Health Canada has granted market authorization to formally transfer the Drug Identification Number (DIN) ownership of BELBUCA® in Canada to our commercial partner, Purdue. This approval triggered a milestone payment to us, which was received October 2017.

On May 17, 2018, we announced that we had entered into definitive agreements with existing institutional and other accredited investors to purchase an aggregate of approximately $50 million worth of our newly designated Series BNon-Voting Convertible Preferred Stock (“Series B Preferred Stock”) in a registered direct offering.

 

On October 12, 2017, we announced that we had entered into a Settlement Agreement with Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc. and Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries, Ltd. (collectively, “Teva”) that resolves our previously reported BUNAVAIL® patent litigation against Teva pending in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.

On May 22, 2018, we announced the closing of the $50 million registered direct offering of newly designated Series B Stock. The offering closed on May 21, 2018, yielding net proceeds of $47.9 million to BDSI. As part of the financing closing, Broadfin Managing Partner Kevin Kotler joined our board, along with Todd Davis and Peter Greenleaf, who were selected by Broadfin. Furthermore, Peter Greenleaf has been named Chairman of our Board of Directors effective immediately.

On August 2, 2018, in connection with our 2018 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, our stockholders approved, among other matters, (i) to amend our Certificate of Incorporation to increase the number of authorized shares of Common Stock from 75,000,000 to 125,000,000; and (ii) to ratify the issuance and sale of our Series B Preferred Stock, par value $.001 per share, and to approve the issuance of Common Stock issuable upon the conversion of the Series B Preferred Stock as required by and in accordance with NASDAQ Marketplace Rule 5635(d).

Our Products and Related Trends

Our product portfolio currently consists of four products. As of the date of this report, three products are approved by the FDA and one is in development. Three of these four products utilize our patented BEMA® thin film drug delivery technology.

 

  

BELBUCA® is indicated for the management of chronic pain severe enough to require daily,around-the-clock, long-term opioid treatment and for which alternative treatment options are inadequate. This product was originally licensed on a worldwide basis to Endo. On October 26, 2015, we announced with Endo that the FDA approved BELBUCA®. BELBUCA® was launched by Endo in February 2016. On December 7, 2016, we entered into an agreement with Endo

terminating Endo’s licensing of rights for BELBUCA®. This followed a strategic decision made by Endo to discontinue commercial efforts in the branded pain business. On January 6, 2017, we announced the closing of the transaction to reacquire the license to BELBUCA® from Endo. As a result, the worldwide rights to BELBUCA® were transferred back to us. Going forward, we

are not responsible for future royalties or milestone payments to Endo and Endo will not be obligated to any future milestone payments to us. Behind a revised commercialization plan, based on market research conducted primarily by Endo that took into consideration the current climate for prescribing opioids for chronic pain, we are leveraging our existing sales force to capitalize on commercial synergies with BUNAVAIL®. This effort is a focused commercial approach targeting identified healthcare providers which we believe create the potential to incrementally grow BELBUCA® sales without the requirement for significant resources. We also will explore other options for longer-term growth for BELBUCA®. Inmid-February 2017, we completed the expansion and training of our sales force, allowing for promotion of BELBUCA® to commence in full in late February. We further expanded our sales force beginning of January 2018 to support the commercialization efforts. BELBUCA® and BUNAVAIL® are currently supported by a field force of approximately sixty-fiveeighty-five sales representatives and fivenine regional sales managers. As previously disclosed, the launch has been more challenging because of the increased scrutiny over the prescribing of opioids that is driven by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines issued in March 2016. The difference that BELBUCA® offers over the Schedule II opioids, such as oxycodone, hydrocodone, morphine, etc., include less addiction and abuse potential along with a ceiling effect on respiratory depression. The approval of BELBUCA® carries a standard post-approval requirement by the FDA to conduct a study to determine the effect of BELBUCA® on QT prolongation (i.e. an abnormal lengthening of the heartbeat). Also required is a study assessing the safety and efficacy of BELBUCA® in pediatric patients and participation in a consortium with other holders of NDAs for long-acting opioids to assess and better understand the risk of abuse, misuse, addiction and overdose with opioids. Prescription sales of BELBUCA have significantly increased since promotion began.

 

  

BUNAVAIL® was approved by the FDA in June 2014 and is indicated for the treatment of opioid dependence. BUNAVAIL® uses our BEMA® technology combined with buprenorphine in tandem with naloxone, an opioid antagonist. We are commercializing BUNAVAIL® ourselves and launched the product during the fourth quarter of 2014. We have been actively engaged in efforts to optimize our commercialization of BUNAVAIL® with particular emphasis in 2016 on better aligning costs with revenue and reducing spending. We will seek to continue to manage our BUNAVAIL® business by focusing sales efforts on those healthcare providers who have been prescribers of BUNAVAIL. And we will continue to use published data evidencing “diversion” (i.e., the illicit use of a legally prescribed controlled substance) associated with the market leader’s product and highlight the other attributes of BUNAVAIL® as we seek to win additional managed care contracts. We also believe there will be an opportunity to introduce more patients to BUNAVAIL® with the lifting of the long-standing limit from 100 to 275 (as outlined in the final ruling by the Department of Health and Human ServicesHHS and effective on August 8, 2016), the number of patients per physician that can be treated at any given time with buprenorphine and more recent legislation allowing nurse practitioners and physician assistants to prescribe buprenorphine for opioid dependence. We will continue to closely monitor commercial efforts and seek to increase revenue and profitability, as well as evaluate all options available to preserve the long-term prospects for and maximize the value of BUNAVAIL®. Separately, as with all other buprenorphine containing products for opioid dependence, the approval of BUNAVAIL® carries a standard post-approval requirement by the FDA to conduct a study to determine the effect of BUNAVAIL® on QT prolongation.

 

  

ONSOLIS® is approved in the U.S., the EU (where it is marketed as BREAKYL) and Taiwan (where it is marketed as PAINKYL™), for the management of breakthrough pain in opioid tolerant adult patients with cancer. ONSOLIS® utilizes our BEMA® thin film drug delivery technology in combination with the narcotic fentanyl. The commercial rights to ONSOLIS® were originally licensed to Meda, a subsidiary of Mylan N.V., in 2006 and 2007 for all territories worldwide except for Taiwan (where it is licensed to TTY). and South Korea. The marketing authorization for ONSOLIS® was returned to us in early 2015 as part of an assignment and revenue sharing agreement with Meda for the United States, Canada and Mexico. Such agreement also facilitated the approval of a new formulation of ONSOLIS® in the U.S. On May 11, 2016, we executed a License Agreement with Collegium under which we granted to Collegium the exclusive rights to develop and commercializeWe are currently assessing our commercial options for ONSOLIS® in the U.S..

 

SustainedRelease

Buprenorphine Extended Release Injection is in development as an injectable, extended release, microparticle formulation of buprenorphine for the treatment of opioid dependence and chronic pain, the rights to which we secured when we entered into a definitive development and exclusive license option agreement from Evonik in October 2014. In 2015, we completed initial development work and preclinical studies which have resulted in the identification of a formulation we believe is capable of providing 30 days of continuous buprenorphine treatment. During apre-IND meeting with FDA in November 2015, FDA requested an additional study to assess the fate of the polymers used in the formulation. In 2016, we completed this study as well as additional preclinical work and other activities to support a planned Phase 1 clinical study. We submitted an Investigational New Drug application (or IND)(“IND”) for this product candidate to the FDA in December 2016.

We expect to continue our research and development of pharmaceutical products and related drug delivery technologies, some of which will be funded by our commercialization agreements. We will continue to seek additional license agreements, which may include upfront payments. We anticipate that funding for the next several years will come primarily from earnings from sales of BELBUCA® and BUNAVAIL®, milestone payments and royalties from Meda and TTY, potential sales of securities and collaborative research agreements, including those with pharmaceutical companies.

Update on Relaunch Activities in the U.S. for ONSOLIS®

On January 27, 2015, we announced that we had entered into an assignment and revenue sharing agreement with Meda to return to us the marketing authorizations for ONSOLIS® for the U.S. and the right to seek marketing authorizations for ONSOLIS® in Canada and Mexico.

On May 11, 2016, we announced the signing of a licensing agreement under which we granted the exclusive rights to develop and commercialize ONSOLIS® in the U.S. to Collegium. Under terms of the agreement, Collegium will bewas responsible for the manufacturing, distribution, marketing and sales of ONSOLIS® in the U.S. Both companies are collaborating on the ongoing transfer of manufacturing, which includes submission of a Prior Approval Supplement FDA. Upon approval of the Supplement, the NDA and manufacturing responsibility will be transferred to Collegium. Financial terms of our agreement with Collegium include a $2.5 million upfrontnon-refundable payment, a $4 million payment upon first commercial sale, $3 million payable to us related to ONSOLIS® patent milestone, up to $17 million in potential payments based on achievement of performance and sales milestones, and upper-teen percent royalties based on various annual U.S. net sales thresholds. Meda shares in the proceeds of our partnership with Collegium, and the completion of this transaction with Collegium required the execution of a definitive termination agreement between us and Meda embodying those significant milestone and royalty-sharing terms and certain other provisions. Meda continues to commercialize ONSOLIS® under the brand name BREAKYL in the E.U. However, on December 8, 2017, Collegium provided us the required90-day notice regarding termination of the license and development agreement for ONSOLIS® between us and Collegium. The license and development agreement for ONSOLIS® between us and Collegium formally ended on March 8, 2018.

EffortsPrevious efforts to extend our supply agreement with our original ONSOLIS® manufacturer Aveva, who was subsequently acquired by Apotex, were unsuccessful and the agreement expired. However, we have secured an alternate supplier was identified and are in the process of qualifying the supplierdata to manufacturer ONSOLIS® for the U.S. market. Based on our current estimates, we believe that we will submit the necessary documentation to FDA forsupport qualification of the new manufacturer bywas submitted to the end of 2017.FDA in June 2018. We are currently assessing options to commercialize ONSOLIS® including partnership or introducing ONSOLIS® utilizing the company’s existing pain sales force.

Results of Operations

Comparison of the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and 20162017

Product Sales. We recognized $8.1$10.8 million and $2.0$7.9 million in product sales during the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and 2016,2017, respectively. The increase is principally due to the reacquisition ofincreased BELBUCA® product sales from the utilization of managed care wins and the expansion of our salesforce in January 2017.2018.

Product Royalty RevenuesRevenues.. We recognized $1.4 million and $1.1$0.6 million in product royalty revenue during the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and 2016,2017, respectively. Of the aforementioned amounts, $0.9 million and $0.4 million, respectively, can be attributed to royalties on net sales of BREAKYL under our license agreement with Meda. We recognized $0.5 million and $0.4$0.2 million in PAINKYL royalty revenue in each ofduring the respective three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2018 and 2017, and 2016,respectively, under our license agreement with TTY. For the three months ended September 30, 2016, we recognized $0.3 million from net sales of BELBUCA® under our license agreement with Endo. The revenue increase is principally due to higher BREAKYL royalty revenue during the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2018 as compared to June 30, 2017 as compared to September 30, 2016.a result of increased sales of BREAKYL in the EU and PAINKYL in Taiwan.

Research and Development Reimbursements. We recognized $0.5$0.2 million of reimbursable revenue related to our agreement with Collegium Pharmaceutical Inc. (“Collegium”) during each of the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017. There was no such revenue recognized during the same period ended June 30, 2018, as Collegium terminated their agreement December 2017, and 2016, respectively, related to our license agreement with Collegium.which was effective March 2018.

Contract Revenues. We recognized $1.2$0.02 million in contract revenue during the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017 upon execution ofrelated to our license agreement with Purdue. There was no such contract revenue during the corresponding three months of 2016.ended June 30, 2017.

Cost of Sales. We incurred $4.4$4.6 million and $2.3$4.2 million in cost of sales during the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and 2016,2017, respectively. Cost of sales during the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2018 was related primarily to BELBUCA® and BUNAVAIL®, which included $3.6 million of product cost, royalties paid and depreciation. Additionally, we paid a total of $0.4 million in quarterly minimum royalty payments to CDC IV, LLC (“CDC”). Cost of sales during the three months ended June 30, 2018 also included $0.5 million and $0.1 million related to BREAKYL and PAINKYL, respectively. Cost of sales during the three months ended June 30, 2017 was related primarily to BELBUCA® and BUNAVAIL®, which included $2.8$2.4 million of product cost, royalties paid and depreciation, and $0.7$1.1 million of fair value of the inventory purchased related to the BELBUCA® reacquisition. Additionally, we paid a total of $0.4 million in quarterly minimum royalty payments to CDC. Cost of sales during the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017 also included $0.3$0.2 million and $0.2$0.02 million related to BREAKYL and PAINKYL, respectively. Cost of sales during the three months ended September 30, 2016 was $1.6 million for BUNAVAIL®, which included product cost, royalties paid, lower of cost or market adjustment, and depreciation. Additionally, we incurred a total of $0.4 million in quarterly minimum payments and royalty payments to CDC. Cost of sales during the three months ended September 30, 2016 also included $0.2 million and $0.06 million related to BREAKYL™ and PAINKYL™, respectively.

Selling, General and Administrative Expenses. During the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and 2016,2017, general and administrative expenses totaled $14.9$14.0 million and $12.1$16.0 million, respectively. Selling, general and administrative costs include

commercialization costs for BELBUCA® and BUNAVAIL®, legal, accounting and management wages, and consulting and professional fees, travel costs, amortization and stock compensation expenses. During the normal course of business, we accrue additional expenses for certain legal matters from time to time, including legal matters related to the protection and enforcement of our intellectual property. The amounts accrued for such legal matters are recorded within accrued expenses on the balance sheet. The decrease in selling, general and administrative expenses during 2018 can be primarily attributed to the settlement of the Teva lawsuit which reduced legal costs and the retirement of company executives which reduced stock compensation expenses.

During the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and 2016,2017, selling, general and administrative expenses included $3.7$1.1 million and $3.6$2.5 million of stock compensation expenses, respectively. This is primarily composed of restricted stock unit expense for our executive management and board of directors. The increase in current period expenses is principally attributed to BELBUCA commercial support. Also included in each of the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2018 and 2017 is amortization expense of $1.1 million for the intangible related to the BELBUCA® reacquisition.

Interest expense. During the three months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2018, we had net interest expense of $2.5 million, consisting of $1.4 million of scheduled interest payments, $0.8 million of related amortization of discount and loan costs and $0.3 million of warrant interest expense. During the three months ended June 30, 2017, we had net interest expense of $1.9 million, consisting of $1.4 million of scheduled interest payments, $0.3 million of related amortization of discount and loan costs and $0.2 million of warrant interest expense, all related to the February 2017 CRG Term Loan Agreement. During the three months ended September 30, 2016, we had net interest expense of $0.8 million, consisting of $0.7 million of scheduled interest payments and $0.01 million of related amortization of discount, all related to the July 2013 secured loan facility from MidCap.

Derivative gain. Our derivative liability consists of free standing warrants measured at their fair market value, using the Black-Scholes model. During the three months ended September 30, 2017, we had no derivative gain or loss. For the corresponding period of 2016, our stock price increased by $0.34. This was the largest component of the Black-Scholes change. However, due to volatility, our derivative liability decreased, resulting in a $0.01 million derivative gain.expense.

Comparison of the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and 20162017

Product Sales. We recognized $23.8$20.6 million and $6.2$15.7 million in product sales during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and 2016,2017, respectively. The increase is principally due to the reacquisition ofincreased BELBUCA® product sales from the utilization of managed care wins and the expansion of our salesforce in January2018. Also included in the aforementioned product sales during the six months ended June 30, 2017 andis $1.7 million additional current year BUNAVAIL®of revenue recorded as a result of changing to thesell-in method as of January 1, 2017.

Product Royalty Revenues. We recognized $3.7$1.8 million and $2.4$2.3 million in product royalty revenue during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and 2016,2017, respectively. Of the aforementioned amounts, $2.1$0.9 million and $1.3$1.2 million, respectively, can be attributed to royalty revenue from BREAKYL under our license agreement with Meda. We recognized $0.7$0.9 million and $0.3$0.4 million respectively, in milestones related to our agreement with Endo during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2018 and 2017, and 2016. We recognized $0.9 million in each of the nine months ended September 30, 2017 and 2016respectively, in PAINKYL royalty revenue under our license agreement with TTY. We recognized $0.7 million in milestones related to our agreement with Endo for BELBUCA® during the six months ended June 30, 2017. The royalty revenue increase compareddecrease results are primarily related to our former agreement with Endo, which revenues associated with BELBUCA® are now in Product Sales after the prior year is primarily from higher sales of BREAKYL during the nine months ended September 30, 2017.reacquisition.

Research and Development Reimbursements. We recognized $0.8 million and $0.5$0.3 million of reimbursable revenue related to our agreement with Collegium during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017 and 2016, respectively. Higher research and development reimbursements2017. There was no such revenue recognized during the ninesame period ended June 30, 2018, as Collegium terminated their agreement December 2017, which was effective March 2018.

Contract Revenues.We recognized $1.0 million in contract revenue during the six months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017 can be attributed to reimbursements2018 related to our license agreement with Collegium.

Contract Revenues.Purdue, which was for the Canadian commercial launch and related milestones. We recognized $21.2$20.0 million of contractdeferred revenue during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017. Of the aforementioned amount,The $20.0 million recognized in 2017 was received in November 2015 as part of thepartial payment from Endo for the BELBUCA® NDA approval. This amount was deferred upon receipt because it was contingently refundable to Endo if a third party generic product was introduced in the U.S. during the patent extension period from 2020 to 2027. However, we entered into a Termination Agreement with Endo on December 7, 2016 which terminated the BELBUCA® license to Endo effective January 6, 2017 and such deferred revenue was recognized. We also recognized $1.2 million in contract revenue during the nine months ended September 30, 2017 related to our license agreement with Purdue. For the first nine months of 2016 we recognized $2.5 million in contract revenue upon execution of our license agreement with Collegium.

Cost of Sales. We incurred $14.3$8.0 million and $9.0$9.8 million in cost of sales during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and 2016,2017, respectively. Cost of sales during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 was $9.5$6.7 million for both BELBUCA® and BUNAVAIL®. Additionally, we paid a total of $0.75 million in quarterly minimum and royalty payments to CDC. Cost of sales during the six months ended June 30, 2018 also includes $0.4 million and $0.2 million related to BREAKYL and PAINKYL, respectively. Cost of sales during the six months ended June 30, 2017 was $8.5 million for both BELBUCA® and BUNAVAIL®.Such product costs include manufacturing, royalties and depreciation and $2.8$2.0 million of fair value of the inventory purchased related to the BELBUCA® reacquisition. Additionally, we paid a total of $1.1$0.75 million in quarterly minimum and royalty payments to CDC. Cost of sales during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017 also includes $0.7$0.4 million and $0.2$0.05 million related to BREAKYL and PAINKYL, respectively. Cost of sales during the nine months ended September 30, 2016 was $5.3 million for BUNAVAIL®. Such product costs include manufacturing, royalties, lower of cost or market adjustment and depreciation. Additionally, we paid a total of $3.0 million in royalty payments to CDC and to Meda related to the aforementioned existing agreements. Cost of sales during the nine months ended September 30, 2016 also includes $0.5 million and $0.1 million related to BREAKYL and PAINKYL, respectively.

Selling,GeneralandAdministrativeExpenses. During the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and 2016,2017, general and administrative expenses totaled $44.1$27.5 million and $37.7$29.2 million, respectively. Selling, general and administrative costs include commercialization costs for BELBUCA® and BUNAVAIL®, management wages and stock-based compensation, legal, accounting and other professional fees, travel costs, and the amortization of our intangible assets including the license and distribution rights from the reacquisition of BELBUCA®asnoted above. During the normal course of business, we accrue additional expenses for certain legal matters from time to time, including legal matters related to the protection and enforcement of our intellectual property. The amounts accrued for such legal matters are recorded within accrued expenses on the balance sheet. The increasedecrease in selling, general and administrative expenses during 20172018 can be primarily attributed to BELBUCA® commercial supportthe settlement of the Teva lawsuit which reduced legal costs and $3.4 millionthe retirement of amortization expense related to the BELBUCA®license and distribution rights intangible. No such amortization expense was incurred in the prior year.company executives which reduced stock compensation expenses.

During the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and 2016,2017, selling, general and administrative expenses included $8.9$2.9 million and $9.5$5.2 million of stock compensation expenses, respectively. This is primarily composed of restricted stock unit expense for our executive management and board of directors.

Interest expenseexpense.. During the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2018, we had net interest expense of $6.7$5.0 million, consisting of $2.9$1.3 million of scheduled interest payments, and $0.8$1.8 million of related amortization of discount and loan costs and $0.4$0.5 million of warrant interest expense. During the six months ended June 30, 2017, we had net interest expense allof $4.8 million, consisting of $1.4 million of scheduled interest payments and $0.5 million of related to the February 2017 CRG Term Loan Agreement.amortization of discount and loan costs and $0.3 million of warrant interest expense. In addition, we had remaining $0.9 million of scheduled interest payments and $1.4 million of related amortization of discount, loan costs and loan pay off and $0.2 million of warrant interest expense all related to the July 2013 secured loan facility from MidCap, which was paid off within full during the CRG term loan. During the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 2016, we had net interest expense of $2.5 million, consisting of $2.2 million of scheduled interest payments, $0.2 million of related amortization of discount and loan costs and $0.1 million in warrant interest expense, all related to the July 2013 secured loan facility from MidCap.

Derivative gain. Our derivative liability consists of free standing warrants measured at their fair market value, using the Black-Scholes model. During the nine months ended September 30, 2017, we sustained no derivative gain or loss. For the corresponding period last year, our stock price decreased by $2.09. This was the largest component of the Black-Scholes change. As a result, our derivative liability also decreased, resulting in a $0.04 million derivative gain.2017.

Revenues

The following table summarizes net product sales for the three and nine monthsix-month periods ended SeptemberJune 30 in thousands:

 

  Three months ended September 30,   Nine months ended September 30,   Three months ended June 30, Six months ended June 30, 
  2017   2016   2017   2016       2018         2017         2018         2017     

BELBUCA®

  $6,437     $—       $17,554     $—       $9,746  $6,563 $17,770  $11,117

% of net product sales

   79%    0%    74%    0%    91  83  86  71

BUNAVAIL®

   1,681      2,009      6,244      6,221      1,020  1,323  2,834  4,563 

% of net product sales

   21%    100%    26%    100%    9  17  14  29
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Net product sales

  $8,118     $2,009     $23,798     $6,221     $10,766  $7,886  $20,604  $15,680 
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

  

 

 

Expenditures for Research and Development Programs

Our research and development expenditures for our approved products and product candidates as of SeptemberJune 30 are as follows in thousands:

 

  Three Months Ended
September 30,
  Nine Months Ended
September 30,
  Cumulative
through
September 30,
  Three Months Ended
June 30,
 Six Months Ended
June 30,
   Cumulative
through
June 30,
 
          2017                  2016                  2017                  2016          2017      2018           2017         2018           2017           2018     

BELBUCA®

  $  126  $    15  $   732  $     32  $   764  $638   $424 $2,414   $606   $125,111 

BUNAVAIL®

     702  1,337    2,474    4,070    7,650   95    620  277    1,772    41,162 

ONSOLIS®

  1,118     113    1,744        678    3,235   97    559  491    626    3,545 

Buprenorphine Depot Injection

         (6)   1,062    1,015     3,007    6,705   22    (109 145    1,021    9,930 

Clonidine Topical Gel*

       46   1,873       280     5,999    6,826   2    96  11    235    27,530 

*

Clonidine Topical Gel product candidate was discontinued in December 2016. Minimal expenses in 2017Expenses thereafter consist of the winding down of the product candidate which includes allocated wages and compensation.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Since inception, we have financed our operations principally from the sale of equity securities, proceeds from short-term borrowings or convertible notes, funded research arrangements and revenue generated as a result of our license and development agreements. We intend to finance our commercialization, research and development and working capital needs from existing cash, royalty revenue, earnings from the continued commercialization of BELBUCA®and BUNAVAIL®, our term loan with CRG (assuming we achieve the conditions for additional funding under such loan), potential new sources of debt and equity financing, existing and new licensing and commercial partnership agreements and, potentially, through the exercise of outstanding common stock options and warrants to purchase common stock.

At SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2018, we had cash and cash equivalents of approximately $19.7$55.7 million. We used $12.3$11.7 million of cash in operations during the ninesix months ended SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 and had stockholders’ equity of $18.9$40.7 million, at September 30, 2017, versus stockholders’ deficitequity of $17.7$8.9 million at December 31, 2016.2017. We expect that we have accesssufficient cash to additional capital frommanage the CRG loanbusiness as currently planned into the second quarter of $15 million as well as equity markets if we choose or a combination of both that2020, which would provide sufficient capital necessary to extendsupport the continued commercialization of BELBUCA® and BUNAVAIL®.

On May 17, 2018, we executed agreements relating to our runway throughregistered direct offering, issuance and sale of an aggregate of 5,000 shares of our newly designated Series BNon-Voting Convertible Preferred Stock. On May 21, 2018, we closed the endoffering, which yielded net proceeds of 2018 and beyond. This assumes that we do not accelerate the development of other opportunities available$47.9 million to us, engage in an extraordinary transaction or otherwise face unexpected events, costs or contingencies, any of which could affect our cash requirements.us.

Additional capital will be required to support ourthe continued commercialization activities forof our BELBUCA® and BUNAVAIL®, our planned development of buprenorphine depot injection, products, the reformulation project for and the anticipated commercial relaunch of ONSOLIS®, the potential continued development of Buprenorphine Extended Release Injection or other products which may be acquired or licensed by us, and for general working capital. Basedcapital requirements. Available resources may be consumed more rapidly than currently anticipated, potentially resulting in the need for additional funding. Additional funding, capital or loans (including, without limitation, milestone or other payments from commercialization agreements) may be unavailable on favorable terms, if at all, which could leave our company without adequate capital resources.

Also, product development timelines and agreements with our development partners, the ability to scale up or reduce personnel and associated costs are factors considered throughout the product development life cycle. Available resources may be consumed more rapidly than currently anticipated, resulting in the need for additional funding.

Accordingly, we anticipate that we will be required to raise additional capital, which may be available to us through a variety of sources, including:

 

public equity markets;

 

private equity financings;

 

commercialization agreements and collaborative arrangements;

 

sale of product royalty;

 

sale of one of our products;

grants and new license revenues;

 

loans from investment funds (such as CRG) or banks;

bank loans;

 

equipment financing;

 

public or private debt; and

 

exercise of existing warrants and options.

As a result of our late filing of certain financing information related to our reacquisition of BELBUCA®, we are unable to utilize our universal shelf registration statement and associatedat-the-market offering program until April 2018.

In addition, readersReaders are cautioned that additional funding, capital or loans (including, without limitation, milestone or other payments from commercialization agreements) may be unavailable on favorable terms, if at all. If adequate funds are not available, we may be required to significantly reduce or refocus our operations or to obtain funds through arrangements that may require us to relinquish rights to certain technologies and drug formulations or potential markets, either of which could have a material adverse effect on us, our financial condition and our results of operations during 2017 and beyond.operations. To the extent that additional capital is raised through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, the issuance of such securities would result in ownership dilution to existing stockholders.

If we are unable to attract additional funds on commercially acceptable terms, it may adversely affect our ability to achieve our development and commercialization goals, which could have a material and adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Contractual Obligations and Commercial Commitments

Our contractual obligations as of SeptemberJune 30, 20172018 are as follows in thousands:

 

  Payments Due by Period   Payments Due by Period 
  Total   

Less than

1 year*

   1-3 years   3-5 years   

More than

5 years

   Total   

Less than

1 year

   1-3 years   3-5 years   

More than

5 years

 

Operating lease obligations

  $1,726   $339   $706   $681   $—     $1,472   $346   $720   $406   $—  

Secured loan facility

   45,161    —      11,290    30,108    3,763 

Interest on secured loan facility

   20,944    5,774    10,841    4,329    —   

Secured loan facility*

   66,315    —      —      66,315    —   

Interest on secured loan facility*

   26,555    5,612    5,830    15,113    —   

Minimum royalty expenses**

   3,375    1,500    1,875    —      —      13,500    1,500    3,000    3,000   6,000

Purchase obligations***

   1,508    493    1,015    —      —   
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

Total contractual cash obligations

  $71,206   $7,613   $24,712   $35,118   $3,763   $109,350   $7,951   $10,565   $84,834   $6,000
  

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

   

 

 

 

*This amount represents obligations through

Assumes no events of default have occurred and the endwe elect to defer 3.5% of the calendar year endingscheduled quarterly interest payments through December 31, 2017.2020 aspaid-in-kind interest as provided for in the amendments to the loan agreement with CRG.

**

Minimum royalty expenses represent a contractual floor that we are obligated to pay CDC and NB Athyrium LLC regardless of actual sales. The minimum payment is $0.4 million per quarter or $1.5 million per year until patent expiry on July 23, 2027.

***

Purchase obligations represent an agreement for the supply of active pharmaceutical ingredient for use in production.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

As of SeptemberJune 30, 2017,2018, we had nooff-balance sheet arrangements.

Effects of Inflation

We do not believe that inflation has had a material effect on our financial position or results of operations. However, there can be no assurance that our business will not be affected by inflation in the future.

Critical Accounting Policies

Our condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with GAAP. For information regarding our critical accounting policies and estimates, please refer to “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates” contained in our annual report on Form10-K for the year ended December 31, 20162017 (the “2016“2017 Annual Report”). As and Note 1 of January 1, 2017, we made a change to an accounting estimatethe accompanying condensed consolidated financial statements in revenue recognition to recognize revenue on thesell-in method.

 

Item 3.Item 3.

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

Foreign currency exchange risk

We currently have, and may in the future have increased, clinical and commercial manufacturing agreements which are denominated in Euros, CAD or other foreign currencies. Such amounts are currently immaterial to our financial position or results of operations. As a result, our financial results could be affected by factors such as a change in the foreign currency exchange rate between the U.S. dollar, Euro, CAD or other applicable currencies, or by weak economic conditions in Europe, Canada or elsewhere in the world. We are not currently engaged in any foreign currency hedging activities.

 

Item 4.

Controls and Procedures

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

As of the end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report, our management, with the participation of our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer (the “Certifying Officers”), conducted evaluations of our disclosure controls and procedures. As defined under Sections 13a–15(e)13a-15(e) and 15d–15(e)15d-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), the term “disclosure controls and procedures” means controls and other procedures of an issuer that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the issuer in the reports that it files or submits under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. Disclosure controls and procedures include without limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by an issuer in the reports that it files or submits under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to the issuer’s management, including the Certifying Officers, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures.

Readers are cautioned that our management does not expect that our disclosure controls and procedures or our internal control over financial reporting will necessarily prevent all fraud and material error. An internal control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met.

Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within our control have been detected. The design of any system of controls also is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any control design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

Based on this evaluation, the Certifying Officers have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures were effective.effective as of June 30, 2018.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during our thirdsecond quarter of 20172018 that materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

CAUTIONARY NOTE ON FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Certain information set forth in this Quarterly Report on Form10-Q, including in Item 2, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” (and the “Liquidity and Capital Resources” section thereof) and elsewhere may address or relate to future events and expectations and as such constitutes “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Act of 1995. Such forward-looking statements involve significant risks and uncertainties. Such statements may include, without limitation, statements with respect to our plans, objectives, projections, expectations and intentions and other statements identified by words such as “projects,” “may,” “could,” “would,” “should,” “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “estimates,” “intends,” “plans” or similar expressions. These statements are based upon the current beliefs and expectations of our management and are subject to significant risks and uncertainties, including those detailed in our filings with the SEC. Actual results, including, without limitation: (i) actual sales results (including the results of our continuing commercial efforts with BELBUCA® and BUNAVAIL®), (ii) the application and availability of corporate funds and our need for future funds, (iii) the timing for completion, and results of, scheduled or additional clinical trials and the FDA’s review and/or approval and commercial activities for our products and product candidates and regulatory filings related to the same or (iv) the results of our ongoing intellectual property litigations and patent office proceedings, may differ significantly from those set forth or anticipated in the forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements also involve other factors which may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to materially differ

from any future results, performance, or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking statements and to vary significantly from reporting period to reporting period. Such factors include, among others, those listed under Item 1A of our 20162017 Annual Report and other factors detailed from time to time in our other filings with the SEC. Although management believes that the assumptions made and expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, there is no assurance that the underlying assumptions will, in fact, prove to be correct or that actual future results will not be different from the expectations expressed in this Quarterly Report. We undertake no obligation to publicallypublicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by applicable law.

PART II. OTHER INFORMATION

 

Item 1.

Legal Proceedings.

Litigation Related To ONSOLIS®

On November 2, 2010, MonoSol filed an action against us and our commercial partners for ONSOLIS®We are involved from time to time in the DNJ for alleged patent infringement and false marking. We were formally served in this matter on January 19, 2011. MonoSol claimed that our manufacturing process for ONSOLIS®, which has never been disclosed publicly and which we and our partners maintain as a trade secret, infringes on its ’588 Patent. Of note, the BEMA® technology itself was not at issue in the case, nor is BELBUCA® or BUNAVAIL®, but rather only the manner in which ONSOLIS®, which incorporates the BEMA® technology, is manufactured. Pursuant to its complaint, MonoSol was seeking an unspecified amount of damages, attorney’s fees and an injunction preventing future infringement of MonoSol’s patents.

We strongly refuted as without merit MonoSol’s assertion of patent infringement, which relatesroutine legal matters incidental to our confidential, proprietary manufacturing process for ONSOLIS®. On September 12, 2011, we filed a request forinterpartes reexamination in the USPTO of MonoSol’s ’588 Patent demonstrating that all claims of such patent were anticipated by or obvious in the light of prior art references, including several prior art references not previously considered by the USPTO, and thus invalid. On September 16, 2011, we filed a motion for stay pending the outcome of the reexamination proceedings, which subsequently was granted.

In November 2011, the USPTO rejected all 191 claims of MonoSol’s ’588 Patent. On January 20, 2012, we filed requests for reexamination before the USPTO of MonoSol’s ’891 Patent and ’292 Patent, the two additional patents asserted by MonoSol, demonstrating that all claims of those two patents were anticipated by or obvious in light of prior art references, including prior art

references not previously considered by the USPTO, and thus invalid. The USPTO granted the requests for reexamination with respect to MonoSol’s ’292 and ’891 Patents. In its initial office action in each, the USPTO rejected every claim in each patent.

As expected, in the ’891 Patent and ’292 Patent Ex Parte Reexamination proceedings, MonoSol amended the claims several times and made multiple declarations and arguments in an attempt to overcome the rejections made by the USPTO. These amendments, declarations and other statements regarding the claim language significantly narrowed the scope of their claims in these two patents. In the case of the ’891 Patent, not one of the original claims survived reexamination and five separate amendments were filed confirming our position that the patent was invalid. Additionally,business. Based upon available information, we believe that argumentsthe resolution of such matters will not have a material adverse effect on our condensed consolidated financial position or results of operations. Except as discussed below, we are not the subject of any pending legal proceedings and, admissions made by MonoSol prevent it from seeking a broader construction during any subsequent litigation by employing arguments or taking positions that contradict those made during prosecution.

A Reexamination Certificate for MonoSol’s ’891 Patent in its amended form was issued August 21, 2012 (Reexamined Patent No. 7,357,891C1 or the “’891C1 Patent”). A Reexamination Certificate for MonoSol’s ’292 Patent in its amended form was issued on July 3, 2012 (Reexamined Patent No. 7,425,292C1 or the “’292C1 Patent”). These actions by the USPTO confirm the invalidity of the original patents and through the narrowing of the claims in the reissued patents strengthens our original assertion that our products and technologies do not infringe on MonoSol’s original patents.

On June 12, 2013, despite our previously noted success in the prior ex parte reexaminations for the ’292 and ’891 Patents, we filed requests forinterpartes reviews (“IPRs”) on the narrowed yet reexamined patents, the ’292C1 and ’891C1 Patents, to challenge their validity and continue to strengthen our position. On November 13, 2013, the USPTO decided not to institute the two IPRs for the ’891 C1 and ’292 C1 Patents. The USPTO’s decision was purely on statutory grounds and based on a technicality (in that the IPRs were not filed within what the UPSTO determined to be the statutory period) rather than substantive grounds. Thus, even though the IPRs were not instituted, the USPTO decision preserves our right to raise the same arguments at a later time (e.g., during litigation). Regardless, our assertion that our products and technologies do not infringe the original ’292 and ’891 Patents and, now, the reexamined ’891 C1 and ’292 C1 Patents remains the same.

Importantly, in the case of MonoSol’s ’588 Patent, at the conclusion of the reexamination proceedings (and its appeals process), on April 17, 2014, the PTAB issued a Decision on Appeal affirming the Examiner’s rejection (and confirming the invalidity) of all the claims of the ’588 Patent. MonoSol did not request a rehearing by the May 17, 2014 due date for making such a request and did not further appeal the Decision to the Federal Courtknowledge of Appeals by the June 17, 2014 due date for making such an appeal. Subsequently, on August 5, 2014, the USPTO issued a Certificate of Reexamination cancelling the ‘588 Patent claims.

Based on our original assertion that our proprietary manufacturing process for ONSOLIS® does not infringe on patents held by MonoSol, and the denial and subsequent narrowing of the claims on the two reissued patents MonoSol has assertedmanagement, no proceedings are presently contemplated against us while the third has had all claims rejected by the USPTO, we remain confident in our original stated position regarding this matter. Thus far, we have proven that the “original” ’292any federal, state or local governmental agency.

Indivior (formerly RB Pharmaceuticals Ltd.) and ’891 patents in light of their reissuance with fewer and narrower claims were indeed invalid and the third and final patent, the ’588 patent, was invalid as well with all its claims cancelled. Given the outcomes of the ‘292, ‘891 and ‘588 reexamination proceedings, at a January 22, 2015 status meeting, the Court decidedAquestive Therapeutics (formerly MonoSol Rx)

Litigation related to lift the stay and grant our request for the case to proceed on an expedited basis with a Motion for Summary Judgment to dismiss the action. On September 25, 2015, the Honorable Freda L. Wolfson granted our motion for summary judgment and ordered the case closed. We were found to be entitled to absolute intervening rights as to both patents in suit, the ‘292 and ‘891 patents and our ONSOLIS® product is not liable for infringing the patents prior to July 3, 2012 and August 21, 2012, respectively. In October 2015, MonoSol appealed the decision of the court to the Federal Circuit. We had no reason to believe the outcome would be different and were prepared to vigorously defend the appeal. MonoSol, however, subsequently decided to withdraw the appeal. On February 25, 2016, MonoSol filed an Unopposed Motion For Voluntary Dismissal Of Appeal, which was granted by the court on February 26, 2016 and the case dismissed. Thus, the district court’s grant of the Summary Judgement of Intervening Rights stands. The possibility exists that MonoSol could file another suit alleging infringement of the ‘292 and ’891 patents. We continue to believe, however, that ONSOLIS® and our other products relying on the BEMA® technology, including BUNAVAIL® and BELBUCA®, do not infringe any amended, reexamined claim from either patent.

Litigation Related To BUNAVAIL®

RB and MonoSol

On October 29, 2013, Reckitt Benckiser, Inc., RB Pharmaceuticals Limited, and MonoSolAquestive (collectively, the “RB Plaintiffs”)RB Plaintiffs) filed an action against us relating to our BUNAVAIL® product in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina (“EDNC”) for alleged patent infringement. BUNAVAIL® is a drug approved for the maintenance treatment of opioid dependence. The RB Plaintiffs claim that the formulation for BUNAVAIL®, which has never been disclosed publicly, infringes its ’832 Patent.

US Patent No. 8,475,832 (the ‘832 Patent). On May 21, 2014, the Court granted our motion to dismiss. In doing so,

On January 22, 2014, Aquestive initiated aninter partesreview (“IPR”) IPR on the Court dismissed the case‘019 Patent, which was instituted. The PTAB upheld all claims of our ‘019 Patent in its entirety. The RB Plaintiffs did2015 and this decision was not appeal the Court Decisionappealed by the June 21, 2014 due date and therefore, the dismissal will stand and the RB Plaintiffs

lose the ability to challenge the Court Decision in the future. The possibility exists, however, that the RB Plaintiffs could file another suit alleging infringement of the ‘832 Patent. If this occurs, based on our original position that our BUNAVAIL® product does not infringe the ‘832 Patent, we would defend the case vigorously (as we have done so previously), and we anticipate that such claims against us ultimately would be rejected.Aquestive.

On September 20, 2014, based upon our position and belief that our BUNAVAIL® product does not infringe any patents owned by the RB Plaintiffs, we proactively filed a declaratory judgment action in the United States District Court for the EDNC requesting the Court to make a determination that our BUNAVAIL® product does not infringe the RB Plaintiffs’ ’832‘832 Patent, ’080US Patent No. 7,897,080 (the “‘080 Patent”) and ’378 Patent. WithUS Patent No. 8,652,378 (the “‘378 Patent”). We invalidated the declaratory judgment, there is“‘080 Patent” in its entirety in an automatic stay in proceedings. The RB Plaintiffs may request that the stay be lifted, but they have the burdeninter partesreexamination proceeding. We invalidated all relevant claims of showing that the stay should be lifted. For the ‘832 Patent the January 15, 2014in aninter partesreview (IPR) proceeding. And, in an IPR was instituted and in June 2015, all challenged claims were rejected for both anticipation and obviousness. In August 2015, the RB Plaintiffs filed an appeal to the Federal Circuit. The Federal Circuit affirmed the USPTO’s decision, and the RB Plaintiffs then filed a Petition for Panel Rehearing and for Rehearing En Banc, which was denied. A mandate issued on October 25, 2016, pursuant to Rule 41(a) of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, meaning that a petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court is no longer possibleproceeding for the RB Plaintiffs. The ’832 IPR was finally resolved with the invalidation of claims15-19. For the ’080‘378 Patent, all claims have been rejected in aninterpartes reexamination and the rejection of all claims as invalid over the prior art has been affirmed on appeal by the PTAB in a decision dated March 27, 2015. In May 2015, the RB Plaintiffs filed a response after the decision to which we filed comments. In December 2015, the PTAB denied MonoSol’s request to reopen prosecution, but provided MonoSol an opportunity to file a corrected response. MonoSol filed the request in December 2015 and we subsequently filed comments on December 23, 2015. The PTAB issued a communication on July 7, 2016 denying MonoSol’s request to reopen prosecution of the rejections of all claims over the prior art. On January 31, 2017, the PTAB issued a final decision maintaining an additional new ground of rejection in addition to the previous grounds of invalidity. As such, all claims remain finally rejected on multiple grounds. MonoSol failed to appeal the final decision and all claims were cancelled in a reexamination certificate issued May 9, 2017.

For the ’378 Patent, an IPR was filed on June 1, 2014, but an IPR was not instituted. However, in issuing its November 5, 2014 decision not to institute the IPR proceeding the PTAB construed the claims of the ’378‘378 Patent narrowly. As in prior litigation proceedings, we believe these IPR and the reexamination filings will provide support for maintaining the stay until the IPR and reexamination proceedings conclude. Indeed, given the PTAB’s narrow constructionShortly thereafter, by joint motion of the claims ofparties, the ’378‘378 Patent we filed a motion to withdraw the ’378 Patentwas subsequently removed from the action.

On June 6, 2016, in an unrelated case on December 12, 2014. In addition, we also filed a joint motion to continuein which Indivior and Aquestive asserted the stay (with RB Plaintiffs)‘832 Patent against other parties, the Delaware District Court entered an order invalidating other claims in the proceedings on‘832 Patent. Indivior and Aquestive cross-appealed all adverse findings in that decision to the same day. BothCourt of Appeals for the motion to withdrawFederal Circuit in CaseNo. 17-2587. Our declaratory judgment action remains stayed pending the ’378 Patent from the proceedingsoutcome of that cross-appeal by Indivior and motion to continue the stay were granted.Aquestive.

On September 22, 2014, the RB Plaintiffs filed an action against us (and our commercial partner) relating to our BUNAVAIL® product in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey for alleged patent infringement. The RB Plaintiffs claim that BUNAVAIL®, whose formulation and manufacturing processes have never been disclosed publicly, infringes its ’167patent U.S. Patent No. 8,765,167 (the ‘167 Patent. As with prior actions by the RB Plaintiffs, we believe this is another anticompetitive attempt by the RB Plaintiffs to distract our efforts from commercializing BUNAVAIL®. We strongly refute as without merit the RB Plaintiffs’ assertion of patent infringement and will vigorously defend the lawsuit. On December 12, 2014, we filed a motion to transfer the case from New Jersey to North Carolina and a motion to dismiss the case against our commercial partner. The Court issued an opinion on July 21, 2015 granting our motion, to transfer the venuethis case was transferred to the ENDC but denying our motion to dismiss the case against our commercial partner as moot. We have also filed aEastern District of North Carolina. A Joint Motion to Stay the case in North Carolina at the end of April 2016, which was granted by the court on May 5, 2016. Thus,and the case is now stayed until a final resolution of the ’167 Patent‘167 IPRs in the USPTO.discussed directly below. We will continue to vigorously defend this case in the EDNC.case.

In a related matter, onOn October 28, 2014, we filed multiple IPR requestspetitions on the ’167 Patent demonstrating that certain claims of such patent were anticipated by or obvious in light of prior art references, including prior art references not previously considered by the USPTO, and thus, invalid.‘167 Patent. The USPTO instituted three of the four IPR requestspetitions. The PTAB upheld the claims and we filed a request for rehearing fordenied collateral estoppel applied to thenon-instituted IPR. The final PTAB decisions finding all claims patentable were issued in March 2016 and we filed a Request for Reconsideration in the USPTO in April 2016, which was denied in September 2016 and2016. We appealed to Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The USPTO intervened with respect to whether collateral estoppel applied to the PTAB. The Federal Circuit did not issue an affirmance without opinion after the February 7, 2018 oral argument. On June 19, 2018, we filed a motion to remand the case for further consideration by the PTAB in November 2016. The appeal is currently proceeding inview of intervening authority. On July 31, 2018, the Federal Circuit with final briefing completed August 7, 2017vacated the decisions, and oral argument pending. Regardless ofremanded the outcome of the appeal, we believe that BUNAVAIL® will be found not to infringe the claims of the ’167 patent.

On January 22, 2014, MonoSol filed a Petition‘167 Patent IPRs for IPRfurther consideration on the ’019 Patent. The Petition asserted that the claims of the ’019 Patent are allegedmerits.

Litigation related to be unpatentable over certain prior art references. The IPR was instituted on August 6, 2014. An oral hearing was held in April 2015 and a decision upholding all seven claims was issued August 5, 2015. In September 2015, MonoSol requested that the PTAB rehear the IPR. On December 19, 2016, the PTAB issued a final decision denying MonoSol’s request for rehearing. MonoSol did not file a notice of appeal to the Federal Circuit by February 20, 2017, therefore, PTAB’s decision upholding all claims of our ’019 Patent will be final and unappealable.BELBUCA®

On January 13, 2017, MonoSolAquestive filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey alleging BELBUCA® infringes the ’167 patent.‘167 Patent. In lieu of answering the complaint, we filed motions to dismiss the complaint and, in the alternative, to transfer the case to the EDNC. Briefing on the motions was completed on June 21, 2017. On July 25, 2017, the New Jersey Court administratively terminated the case pending the parties submission of a joint stipulation of transfer because the District of New Jersey was an inappropriate venue. This case has beenwas later transferred to the Delaware District Court. On October 31, 2017 we filed motions to dismiss the complaint and, in the alternative, to transfer the case to the EDNC. Briefing on the motions was completed on December 8, 2017. We anticipate receiving a decision on the motions from the Delaware District Court by the 4th quarter of 2018 or the 1st quarter of 2019. We strongly refute as without merit MonoSol’sAquestive’s assertion of patent infringement and will vigorously defend the lawsuit.

Litigations related to BUNAVAIL®

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA (formerly Actavis)

On February 8, 2016, we received a notice relating to a Paragraph IV certification from ActavisTeva Pharmaceuticals USA (“Teva”) (formerly Actavis) seeking to find invalid the BUNAVAIL® Patentsthree Orange Book listed patents relating specifically to BUNAVAIL®. The Paragraph IV certification relatesrelated to the ANDAan Abbreviated New Drug Application (the “ANDA”) filed by ActavisTeva with the FDAU.S Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) for a generic formulation of BUNAVAIL®. The BUNAVAIL®Patentspatents subject to Actavis’Teva’s certification are the ’019were U.S. Patent the ’866No. 7,579,019 (the “‘019 Patent”) , U.S. Patent No. 8,147,866 (the “‘866 Patent”) and the ’177 Patent. Under the Food Drug and Cosmetic Act, as amended by the Hatch-Waxman Amendments, after receipt of a valid Paragraph IV notice, we may, and in this case did, bring a patent infringement suit in federal district court against Actavis within 45 days from the date of receipt of the certification notice. 8,703,177 (the “‘177 Patent”).

On March 18, 2016, we filed a complaint in Delaware against Actavis, thus we are entitled to receive a 30 month stay on the FDA’s ability to give final approval to any proposed products that reference BUNAVAIL®. The 30 month stay is expected to preempt any final approval by the FDA on Actavis’ ANDA until at least August of 2018.

We asserted three different patents against Actavis,Teva, the ’019‘019 Patent, the ’866‘866 Patent, and the ’177‘177 Patent. ActavisTeva did not raisenon-infringement positions with regard toabout the ’019‘019 and the ’866‘866 Patents in its Paragraph IV certification. ActavisTeva did raise anon-infringement position on the ’177‘177 Patent due to its assertion that the backing layer for its generic product does not have a pH within the claimed range claimed in the patent. Webut we asserted in our complaint that ActavisTeva infringed the ’177‘177 Patent either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents.

We believe that Actavis is unlikely to prevail on its claims that the ’019, ’866, and ’177 Patents are invalid, and, as we have done in the past, intend to vigorously defend our intellectual property. Each of the three patents carries the presumption of validity, and the ’019 Patent has already been the subject of an unrelated IPR before the USPTO under which we prevailed, and all claims of the ’019 Patent survived. IPR petitioner MonoSol’s request for rehearing of the final IPR decision regarding the ’019 Patent was denied by the USPTO on December 19, 2016. MonoSol did not appeal and the decision is final.

On December 20, 2016 the USPTO issued ’188U.S. Patent No. 9,522,188 (“the ‘188 Patent”), and this patent was properly listed in the Orange Book as covering the BUNAVAIL® product. On February 23, 2017 ActavisTeva sent a Paragraph IV certification adding the ’188 Patent9,522,188 to its ANDA. WeAn amended Complaint was filed, adding the complaint to add the ’188‘188 Patent to the current litigation.

On January 31, 2017, we received a notice relating to a Paragraph IV certification from Teva relating to Teva’s ANDA on additional strengths of BUNAVAIL®. Teva’s parent company, Teva Pharmaceuticals Ltd., recently acquired Actavis through an acquisition. On and on March 16, 2017, we brought suit against Teva and its parent company on these additional strengths within 45 days from the receipt of the notice in Delaware. As in the original case brought by Actavis, we are again entitled to receive a 30 month stay on the FDA’s ability to give final approval to any proposed products that reference the additional strengths of BUNAVAIL®. The 30 month stay is expected to extend until at least August of 2019.strengths. On June 20, 2017, the Court entered orders staying both BUNAVAIL® suits at the request of the parties.

On May 23, 2017, the USPTO issued U.S. Patent 9,655,843 (the “’843“‘843 Patent”), relating to the BEMA® technology, and this patent was properly listed in the Orange Book as covering the BUNAVAIL® product.

OnFinally, on October 12, 2017, we announced that we had entered into a settlement agreement with Teva that resolved our BUNAVAIL® patent litigation against Teva pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. As part of the Settlement Agreement, which is subject to review by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice, we have entered into anon-exclusive license agreement with Teva that permits Teva to first begin selling its generic version of BUNAVAIL® in the U.S. on July 23, 2028 or earlier under certain circumstances. Other terms of the agreement are confidential.

Litigations related to BELBUCA®

We received notices regarding Paragraph IV certifications from Teva on November 8, 2016, November 10, 2016, and December 22, 2016, seeking to find invalid the BELBUCA® Patentstwo Orange Book listed patents relating specifically to BELBUCA®. The Paragraph IV certifications relate to three ANDAs filed by Teva with the FDA for a generic formulation of BELBUCA®. The Patentspatents subject to Teva’s certification arewere the ’019‘019 Patent and the ’866‘866 Patent. Under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments, after receipt of a valid Paragraph

IV notice, we may, and in this case did, bring a patent infringement suit in federal district court against Teva within 45 days from the date of receipt of the certification notice. We filed complaints in Delaware against Teva on December 22, 2016 and February 3, 2017 thusin which we are entitled to receive a 30 month stay on the FDA’s ability to give final approval to any proposed products that reference BELBUCA®. The 30 month stay is expected to preempt any final approval by the FDA on Teva’s ANDA Nos. 209704 and 209772 until at least May of 2019 and for Teva’s ANDA No. 209807 until at least June of 2019.

We have asserted two different patents against Teva the ’019‘019 Patent and the ’866‘866 Patent. Teva did not contest infringement of the claims of the ’019‘019 Patent and also did not contest infringement of the claims of the ’866‘866 Patent.

The ‘019 Patent that cover BELBUCA® in its Paragraph IV certifications.

We believe that Teva is unlikely to prevail on its claims that the ’019 and ’866 Patents are invalid, and, as we have done in the past, intend to vigorously defend its intellectual property. Both of the patents carry the presumption of validity, and the ’019 Patent hashad already been the subject of an unrelated IPR before the USPTO under which we prevailed, and all claims of the ’019‘019 Patent survived. IPR Petitioner MonoSol’sAquestive’s request for rehearing of the final IPR decision regarding the ’019‘019 Patent was denied by the USPTO on December 19, 2016. MonoSolAquestive did not file a timely appeal at the Federal Circuit.

On May 23, 2017, the USPTO issued U.S. Patent 9,655,843 (the “’843“‘843 Patent”), relating to the BEMA® technology, and this patent was properly listed in the Orange Book as covering the BELBUCA® product.

A five (5) day bench trial is currently scheduled to begin on November 19, 2018.

On August 28, 2017, the Court entered orders staying both BELBUCA® suits at the request of the parties. On October 18, 2017, the Court

In February 2018, we announced that we had entered orders continuing the stay in bothinto a settlement agreement with Teva that resolved our BELBUCA® suits atpatent litigation against Teva pending in the requestU.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. As part of the parties.settlement agreement, which is subject to review by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice, we have granted Teva anon-exclusive license (for which we will receive no current or future payments) that permits Teva to first begin selling the generic version of our BELBUCA® product in the U.S. on January 23, 2027 or earlier under certain circumstances (including, for example, upon (i) the delisting of thepatents-in-suit from the U.S. FDA Orange Book, (ii) the granting of a license by us to a third party to launch another generic form of BELBUCA® at a date prior to January 23, 2027, or (iii) the occurrence of certain conditions regarding BELBUCA® market share). Other terms of the Agreement are confidential.

2018 Arkansas Opioid Litigation

On March 15, 2018, the State of Arkansas, and certain counties and cities in that State, filed an action in the Circuit Court of Arkansas, Crittenden County against multiple manufacturers, distributors, retailers, and prescribers of opioid analgesics, including our company. We were served with the complaint on April 27, 2018. The complaint specifically alleged that we licensed our branded fentanyl buccal soluble film ONSOLIS® to Collegium, and Collegium is also named as a defendant in the lawsuit. ONSOLIS® is not presently sold in the United States and the license agreement with Collegium was terminated prior to Collegium launching ONSOLIS® in the United States. Therefore, on June 28, 2018, we moved to dismiss the case against us and most recently, on July 6, 2018, the plaintiffs filed a notice to voluntarily dismiss us from the Arkansas case, without prejudice.

 

Item 1A.

Risk Factors.

The following risk factor is provided regarding our President and Chief Executive Officer’s planned retirement in January 2018.

We depend upon key personnel who may terminate their employment with us at any time. Moreover, our current President and Chief Executive Officer is retiring as of January 2018, and we may be unable to fill that key position with a qualified candidate, which could adversely impact our company.

Our ability to achieve our corporate objectives will depend to a significant degree upon the continued services of key management, technical and scientific personnel, particularly our senior executive officers such as our President and Chief Executive Officer Mark Sirgo. Our management and other employees may voluntarily terminate their employment with us at any time. The loss of the services of these or other key personnel, or the inability to attract and retain additional qualified personnel, could result in delays to product development or approval, loss of sales and diversion of management resources. In addition, we depend on our ability to attract and retain other highly skilled personnel, including research scientists. Competition for qualified personnel is intense, and the process of hiring and integrating such qualified personnel is often lengthy. We may be unable to recruit such personnel on a timely basis, if at all, which would negatively impact our development and commercialization programs. Additionally, we do not currently maintain “key person” life insurance on the lives of our executives or any of our employees. This lack of insurance means that we may not have adequate compensation for the loss of the services of these individuals.

In particular, Dr. Sirgo is retiring as our President and Chief Executive Officer in January 2018. We are currently conducting a search for a successor to Dr. Sirgo. Recruiting qualified candidates for such senior executive positions within the specialty pharmaceutical industry is challenging, and we may be unsuccessful in filling that key position with a qualified candidate, or even if we do fill that position, that such candidate will perform according to our expectations. In addition, during the transition to a new President and Chief Executive Officer, we may encounter challenges in our operations which could impact our results of operations.No update.

 

Item 2.

Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds.

None.

 

Item 3.

Defaults upon Senior Securities.

None.

Item 4.

Mine Safety Disclosures.

Not applicable.

 

Item 5.

Other Information.

None.

Item 6.

Exhibits.

 

Number

  

Description

  10.1

  LicenseEmployment Agreement, dated July 12, 2017May 2, 2018, by and between the Company Arius and Purdue Pharma (+)Herm Cukier. (1)

  10.2

Indemnification Agreement, dated May 2, 2018, by and between the Company and Herm Cukier. (1)
  10.3Confidentiality, Intellectual Property andNon-Competition Agreement, dated May  2, 2018, by and between the Company and Herm Cukier. (1)
  10.4Form of Certificate of Designation of Series BNon-Voting Convertible Preferred Stock (2)
  10.5Placement Agency Agreement, dated May 17, 2018, between the Company and William Blair & Company, L.L.C. (2)
  10.6Form of Securities Purchase Agreement, dated May 17, 208, between the Company and the investors named therein. (2)
  10.7Registration Rights Agreement, dated May 17, 2018, between the Company and Broadfin Healthcare Master Fund, Ltd. (2)
  10.8Agreement, dated May 17, 2018, between the Company and Broadfin Healthcare Master Fund, Ltd. (2)
  10.9Amendment No. 2 to Term Loan Agreement, dated May  16, 2018, among the Company, CRG Servicing LLC, as administrative agent and collateral agent, and the lenders named therein. (2)
  10.10Form of Retirement Agreement, dated May  17, 2018, between the Company, the retiring directors named therein and Broadfin Healthcare Master Fund, Ltd. (2)
  10.11Amendment to the Agreement dated May 17, 2018, dated May  20, 2018, by and between the Company and Broadfin Healthcare Master Fund, Ltd. (3)
  31.1

  Certification of ChiefPrincipal Executive Officer Pursuant To Sarbanes-Oxley Section 302302. (*) 
  31.2Certification of Principal Financial Officer Pursuant To Sarbanes-Oxley Section 302. (*)

  31.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant To Sarbanes-Oxley Section 302 (*)

  32.1

  Certification Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 13501350. (*)

  32.2

  Certification Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 13501350. (*)

101.ins

  XBRL Instance DocumentDocument.

101.sch

  XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema DocumentDocument.

101.cal

  XBRL Taxonomy Calculation Linkbase DocumentDocument.

101.def

  XBRL Taxonomy Definition Linkbase DocumentDocument.

101.lab

  XBRL Taxonomy Label Linkbase DocumentDocument.

101.pre

  XBRL Taxonomy Presentation Linkbase DocumentDocument.

 

+

Confidential treatment is being requested for certain portions of this exhibit pursuant to 17 C.F.R. Sections 200.8(b)(4) and240.24b-2.

*

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

(1)

Previously filed as an exhibit to the Company’s Current Report on Form8-K filed on May 8, 2018.

(2)

Previously filed as an exhibit to the Company’s Current Report on Form8-K filed on May 17, 2018.

(3)

Previously filed as an exhibit to the Company’s Current Report on Form8-K filed on May 21, 2018.

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Exchange Act, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

 

  BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTERNATIONAL, INC.
Date: NovemberAugust 9, 2017
By:

/s/ Mark A. Sirgo

Mark A. Sirgo, President, Chief Executive Officer and Vice Chairman

(Principal Executive Officer)

Date: November 9, 20172018  
  By: 

/s/ Ernest R. De Paolantonio

Herm Cukier
Herm Cukier
   

Chief Executive Officer and Director

(Principal Executive Officer)

Date: August 9, 2018
By:/s/ Ernest R. De Paolantonio
Ernest R. De Paolantonio

Secretary, Treasurer and

Chief Financial Officer (Principal

(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)

 

S-1